Re: [Computer-go] KGS bot tournaments - what are your opinions?

[Stefan Kaitschick]

On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 7:21 PM, Dave Dyer  wrote:

>
> How about handicapping the hardware based on time.  Programs running
> on more powerful hardware would get less time.
>
>
 I think that's a good idea. Programs could even aquire a time ranking,
depending on their success in previous tournaments.
___
Computer-go mailing list
Computer-go@computer-go.org
http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go

Re: [Computer-go] KGS bot tournaments - what are your opinions?

[Tobias Graf]

Hi,
just my 2 cents:

1. "Reducing computing power." Just let me quote the standings of the 
last 9x9 tournament.

1) 18 Cores
2) 80 Cores
3) 12 Cores
4) 288 Cores
5) 8 Cores

Moreover, using the 18 cores of place number one is affordable to 
everyone as Remi outlined.


Still, i would compete in a few desktop-hardware-tournaments. It should 
just have reasonable limits, there is no point to make a tournament on 
raspberry pi's ;-) Maybe one of the slow-tournaments can be changed into 
a desktop-hardware tournament.


2) stefan kaitschick proposed to "force a minimum time consumption on 
the first moves of 9*9 games. It's annoying as a spectator to have the 
first 8 moves or so just spit out on the board, forcing you to go back 
to see what happened there."
I don't like forcing too many things. But it is a very good idea, so i 
just added a one second book-delay to abakus. Maybe other authors find 
this useful, too.


Best,
Tobias

On 10/07/2015 12:27 PM, Nick Wedd wrote:
I am thinking of making some small changes to the way I run bot 
tournaments on KGS.  If you have ever taken part in a KGS bot 
tournament, I would like to hear your opinions on three things.



1.  Limit on processor power?

This is the main point on which I want your opinions.  The other two 
are trivial.


Several people have suggested to me that these events would be fairer 
if there were a limit on the computing power of the entrants. I would 
like to do this, but I don't know how. I have little understanding of 
the terminology, I don't know how /e.g./ multiple cores in one 
computer compare with multiple computers on one network, and I don't 
know how to count a graphics card. /If/ someone can find a way to 
specify an upper limit to permitted power which is clear and easy to 
understand, and /if/ most entrants would favor imposing such a limit, 
I will discuss what it should be, and apply it.  I am not able to 
check what entrants are really running on, but I will trust people.



2. Zeroes in the "Annual Championship" table.

The table at http://www.weddslist.com/kgs/annual/index.html has a 0 in 
a cell where a program competed but did not score, and a blank where 
it did not compete (at least it should do, I sometimes get it wrong). 
I would prefer to omit these zeroes, they seem a bit rude. Also there 
is no clear distinction between competing and not competing - how 
should I treat a program which crashes and disappears after two 
rounds, or one (like AyaMC last Sunday) which plays in every round but 
is broken and has no chance of winning?  I realise that the zeroes 
some convey information that may be of interest. Should I continue to 
use them, or just leave those cells blank?



3. Live crosstable

When I write up my reports, I include a crosstable, like the one near 
the top of http://www.weddslist.com/kgs/past/116/index.html .  This is 
easy for me, I run a script which reads the data from the KGS page 
(http://www.gokgs.com/tournEntrants.jsp?sort=s=990 in this case) 
and builds the crosstable in html, which I copy into the tournament 
report. It only works for Swiss (and maybe Round Robin) tournaments. 
It works while the tournament is still running, though only between 
rounds.I could build a current crosstable each round during a 
tournament if there is any demand for it.


--
Nick Wedd mapr...@gmail.com 


___
Computer-go mailing list
Computer-go@computer-go.org
http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go


___
Computer-go mailing list
Computer-go@computer-go.org
http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go

[Computer-go] PostDoc: General Video Game AI

[Lucas, Simon M]

I have an opening for a post-doc (senior research officer)
to work on General Video Game AI.  The aim is
to further develop hybrid approaches involving:


· Monte Carlo Tree Search

· Rolling Horizon Evolutionary Algorithms

· Deep Neural Networks

The methods will be tested on a range of
Game AI challenges, in particular using our
General Video Game AI evaluation server:
http://gvgai.net


Salary: £31,342 - £36,309 per annum
Closing date: 9 November 2015

More details of the post can be found here:

http://tinyurl.com/gvgai-pd

For a recent paper on general video game AI, see here:

http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?arnumber=7038214=1

Best wishes,

 Simon Lucas



Professor Simon Lucas
Head of School
Computer Science and Electronic Engineering
University of Essex



___
Computer-go mailing list
Computer-go@computer-go.org
http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go

[Computer-go] Nao Go anyone?

[djhbrown .]

.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-7JJDT4jcA0=PL4y5WtsvtduozO-9oG5nZZI8IPUD6EDif=12
___
Computer-go mailing list
Computer-go@computer-go.org
http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go

Re: [Computer-go] KGS bot tournaments - what are your opinions?

[Erik van der Werf]

On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 1:10 PM, Tobias Graf  wrote:
> 1. "Reducing computing power." Just let me quote the standings of the last
> 9x9 tournament.
> 1) 18 Cores
> 2) 80 Cores
> 3) 12 Cores
> 4) 288 Cores
> 5) 8 Cores

Counting 'cores' is a bad idea; 'core' is mostly just a marketing term.
___
Computer-go mailing list
Computer-go@computer-go.org
http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go

Re: [Computer-go] Computer-go Digest, Vol 69, Issue 14

[Cai Gengyang]

ich I copy into the tournament
> > report. It only works for Swiss (and maybe Round Robin) tournaments.
> > It works while the tournament is still running, though only between
> > rounds.I could build a current crosstable each round during a
> > tournament if there is any demand for it.
> >
> > --
> > Nick Wedd mapr...@gmail.com <mailto:mapr...@gmail.com>
> >
> >
> > ___
> > Computer-go mailing list
> > Computer-go@computer-go.org
> > http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
>
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://computer-go.org/pipermail/computer-go/attachments/20151008/9cdf912a/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> --
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> ___
> Computer-go mailing list
> Computer-go@computer-go.org
> http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
>
> --
>
> End of Computer-go Digest, Vol 69, Issue 14
> ***
>
___
Computer-go mailing list
Computer-go@computer-go.org
http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go

Re: [Computer-go] KGS bot tournaments - what are your opinions?

[Hideki Kato]

Tobias and all,

Tobias Graf: <56164f25.8010...@gmx.de>:
>Hi,
>just my 2 cents:
>
>1. "Reducing computing power." Just let me quote the standings of the 
>last 9x9 tournament.
>1) 18 Cores
>2) 80 Cores
>3) 12 Cores
>4) 288 Cores
>5) 8 Cores
>
>Moreover, using the 18 cores of place number one is affordable to 
>everyone as Remi outlined.

Looking at the before last 9x9 tournament 
(http://www.weddslist.com/kgs/past/113/index.html):
1) 20 cores x 3 GHz (Zen)
2) 18 cores x 2.9 GHz (CrazyStone)
3) 12 cores x 2.8 GHz (DolBaram)
4) 6 cores x 3.3 GHz (Aya)
5) 80 cores x 2.6GHz (Abakus).
#Zen, DolBaram and Aya were (practically) absent at the last 9x9.
##Above clock frequency numbers are rated ones and actual values can 
vary due to Intel Turbo Boost Tech.  My Xeon box usually runs at 3.3 to 
3.5 GHz.

Even 6-cores can beat 80-cores.  This is not surprising on small boards.  
Please evaluate the boost of your network parallelization on 9x9.  It's 
(maybe) very small (or sometimes negative; depends on the method, number 
of node computers, etc).  Cluster parallelization is, however, very 
important to push-up last one or two ranks on larger boards.

>Still, i would compete in a few desktop-hardware-tournaments. It should 
>just have reasonable limits, there is no point to make a tournament on 
>raspberry pi's ;-) Maybe one of the slow-tournaments can be changed into 
>a desktop-hardware tournament.
>
>2) stefan kaitschick proposed to "force a minimum time consumption on 
>the first moves of 9*9 games. It's annoying as a spectator to have the 
>first 8 moves or so just spit out on the board, forcing you to go back 
>to see what happened there."
>I don't like forcing too many things. But it is a very good idea, so i 
>just added a one second book-delay to abakus. Maybe other authors find 
>this useful, too.

Yes, it also helps human players prevent making a bad move on the spur 
of the moment.

Hideki

>On 10/07/2015 12:27 PM, Nick Wedd wrote:
>> I am thinking of making some small changes to the way I run bot 
>> tournaments on KGS.  If you have ever taken part in a KGS bot 
>> tournament, I would like to hear your opinions on three things.
>>
>>
>> 1.  Limit on processor power?
>>
>> This is the main point on which I want your opinions.  The other two 
>> are trivial.
>>
>> Several people have suggested to me that these events would be fairer 
>> if there were a limit on the computing power of the entrants. I would 
>> like to do this, but I don't know how. I have little understanding of 
>> the terminology, I don't know how /e.g./ multiple cores in one 
>> computer compare with multiple computers on one network, and I don't 
>> know how to count a graphics card. /If/ someone can find a way to 
>> specify an upper limit to permitted power which is clear and easy to 
>> understand, and /if/ most entrants would favor imposing such a limit, 
>> I will discuss what it should be, and apply it.  I am not able to 
>> check what entrants are really running on, but I will trust people.
>>
>>
>> 2. Zeroes in the "Annual Championship" table.
>>
>> The table at http://www.weddslist.com/kgs/annual/index.html has a 0 in 
>> a cell where a program competed but did not score, and a blank where 
>> it did not compete (at least it should do, I sometimes get it wrong). 
>> I would prefer to omit these zeroes, they seem a bit rude. Also there 
>> is no clear distinction between competing and not competing - how 
>> should I treat a program which crashes and disappears after two 
>> rounds, or one (like AyaMC last Sunday) which plays in every round but 
>> is broken and has no chance of winning?  I realise that the zeroes 
>> some convey information that may be of interest. Should I continue to 
>> use them, or just leave those cells blank?
>>
>>
>> 3. Live crosstable
>>
>> When I write up my reports, I include a crosstable, like the one near 
>> the top of http://www.weddslist.com/kgs/past/116/index.html .  This is 
>> easy for me, I run a script which reads the data from the KGS page 
>> (http://www.gokgs.com/tournEntrants.jsp?sort=s=990 in this case) 
>> and builds the crosstable in html, which I copy into the tournament 
>> report. It only works for Swiss (and maybe Round Robin) tournaments. 
>> It works while the tournament is still running, though only between 
>> rounds.I could build a current crosstable each round during a 
>> tournament if there is any demand for it.
>>
>> -- 
>> Nick Wedd mapr...@gmail.com 
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Computer-go mailing list
>> Computer-go@computer-go.org
>> http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
> inline file
>___
>Computer-go mailing list
>Computer-go@computer-go.org
>http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
-- 
Hideki Kato 
___
Computer-go mailing list
Computer-go@computer-go.org