Re: [Computer-go] Tromp Taylor rules http://senseis.xmp.net/?LogicalRules
For the purposes of scoring, the edges are ignored (Which means, if an empty point is on the edge of the board, it does not change the ownership of the point). If an empty point is adjacent to only white stones, it belongs to white. If an empty point is adjacent to only black stones, it belongs to black. If an empty point is adjacent to both white and black stones, it is neutral territory that belongs to neither. Here is a video which explains scoring a game under both Chinese and Japanese rules: Go (Baduk, Weiqi) - Counting The Final Score | | | | | | | | | | | Go (Baduk, Weiqi) - Counting The Final Score | | | | View on www.youtube.com | Preview by Yahoo | | | | | On Wednesday, March 11, 2015 8:21 AM, folkert folk...@vanheusden.com wrote: Alvaro, Urban, thanks! I've got an additional question. It may be obvious but it is written a bit ambiguous imho on senseis.xmp.net: A player's score is the number of points of her color, plus the number of empty points that reach only her color. So an empty point that can reach the border of the board doesn't count, right? On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 12:48:59PM +0100, Urban Hafner wrote: As Alvaro said, you should just implement Tromp Taylor and if you want to play on CGOS or KGS (chinese rules only) you just need to make suicide illegal and you're good to go. Urban On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 12:44 PM, Álvaro Begué alvaro.be...@gmail.com wrote: Ko is not missing: It is a particular case of the prohibition to repeat positions. Making suicide illegal is an easy patch. Álvaro. On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 7:08 AM, folkert folk...@vanheusden.com wrote: Hi, After 3 years of not working on my Go software, I decided to tinker again a bit on it. First thing I noticed is that it is very slow. I have a feeling that my implementation of the rules is way too complex. I did it all from scratch and as I never played a game of Go before, it may have a clumsy design. So I'm considering rewriting things. I read back in the archives of this mailinglist and I read about the Tromp/Taylor rules. If I implement those, will I really have a program that plays valid Go and can participate in CGOS maybe even KGS one day? Because things like KO and suicide etc are missing? thanks Folkert van Heusden -- You've probably gotten really fed up with never winning in the Mega- Millions lottery. Well, weep no longer: www.smartwinning.info tells you everything that might help you deciding what numbers to choose. With nice graphs and pretty animations! ___ 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 -- Blog: http://bettong.net/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/ujh Homepage: http://www.urbanhafner.com/ ___ Computer-go mailing list Computer-go@computer-go.org http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go Folkert van Heusden -- www.vanheusden.com/multitail - win een vlaai van multivlaai! zorg ervoor dat multitail opgenomen wordt in Fedora Core, AIX, Solaris of HP/UX en win een vlaai naar keuze -- Phone: +31-6-41278122, PGP-key: 1F28D8AE, www.vanheusden.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
Re: [computer-go] Fuego parameter question
Has anyone tried running Fuego on linux via VM on Windows? Is it faster than cygwin-Fuego on Windows? (I don't know how much VM performance varies but http://www.virtualbox.org/ is freely available for testing.) With a newer version of Windows and a multi-core machine it might not a bad option. Ben. From: Ben Lambrechts benedic...@fedoraproject.org To: computer-go computer-go@computer-go.org Sent: Sat, December 5, 2009 3:44:44 AM Subject: Re: [computer-go] Fuego parameter question If you really want to test MFOG against Fuego, it is better to run Fuego on a strong Linux-machine. The Cygwin-version is significantly slower than the full-build I have on the same machine with Fedora. I provide the Cygwin for people who are not familiar enough with linux or are not able to build the engines themselves with Cygwin. --- With kind regards, Ben Lambrechts Windows builds for GNU Go and Fuego : http://gnugo.baduk.org/ Fuego opening books : http://gnugo.baduk.org/fuegoob.htm On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 5:54 AM, David Fotland fotl...@smart-games.com wrote: Many Faces is getting too strong for Gnugo. I test using 8K playouts per move on 19x19 and win about 89% of the games. I just tried testing against Fuego to get a stronger opponent. I used fuego-svn985 from http://gnugo.baduk.org/, already built for Windows. I ran it with: fuego c:\go\goprograms\fuego-svn985\fuego -srand 0 -quiet -config config.txt config.txt is: uct_param_player ignore_clock 1 uct_param_player max_games 8000 uct_param_search number_threads 1 uct_command_player ponder 0 I expected to win 50 to 60% of the games, but won 88% of 1300 games. There were several games that Fuego lost due to a superko violation. Am I missing a parameter to set the rules to Chinese with superko? Am I missing a parameter to give the strength I've seen in KGS tournaments? Perhaps Many Faces is relatively stonger with few playouts due to its knowledge and Fuego will do better with more playouts? David ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
[computer-go] Go Programming Language
Has anyone tried programming Go in the Go Programming Language? http://golang.org/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] CGOS 19x19 anchor
Don, One possibility would be to have two open-source anchors (fuego and gnugo?) and ensure that a full-strength version would never be paired with it's own limited-strength anchor version. Ben. From: Don Dailey dailey@gmail.com To: computer-go computer-go@computer-go.org Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 10:10:09 AM Subject: Re: [computer-go] CGOS 19x19 anchor Is there statistical proof that this is a major issue? I have not reviewed the reference to the forum post but I would like to say this: If you expect something to happen, you will notice it when it does even if what you think is happening really isn't.I'm not saying it didn't or doesn't happen, but caution is in order. To be sure that this really is what you think, you must play a huge number of games.You must also look at the head to head against the 2 versions in question.To illustrate the magnitude of the problem, there is about a 50/50 chance you will see this phenomenon to some degree even if it doesn't exist.Even to get the error bars under 10 ELO you have to play something like 3000 games between the 2 versions in question and then a similar number of games between other programs with BOTH versions. I have no doubt this is somewhat of an issue, even between MCTS programs in general but I doubt it's major (I could be wrong - depending on how you define major.) To quantify it you must play tens of thousands of games in order to nail this down to within 10 or 20 ELO.You could get by on less games if the problem is bigger of course. If this really is a problem I can minimize the impact of this - at the sacrifice of diversity. In other words, if I increase the diversity with server adjustments, then if you have a strong program, you will have to play weaker opponents more often. This will also make the ratings less stable which could cause people to have false observations (and I'm not claiming this is a false observation, but is there proof that it's major?) Anway, I provide a digest of all results (and the SGF games are available) in order for anyone who wishes to scrutinize the results and show that it's statistically improbable (which it might be.) - Don On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 10:30 AM, Hiroshi Yamashita y...@bd.mbn.or.jp wrote: Can you explain this? I don't understand what you are saying. Once I ran both 1 core and 2 cores Aya on 19x19 CGOS, 2 cores Aya got high rating. But without 1 core Aya, 2 cores Aya could not get such a high rating. Remi also reported same phenomenon. [computer-go] CGOS Deflation or Self-Play delusion? http://computer-go.org/pipermail/computer-go/2008-February/013995.html Regards, Hiroshi Yamashita - Original Message - From: Don Dailey dailey@gmail.com To: computer-go computer-go@computer-go.org Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 11:12 PM Subject: Re: [computer-go] CGOS 19x19 anchor On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 10:10 AM, Hiroshi Yamashita y...@bd.mbn.or.jpwrote: I restarted the 19x19 server. Thank you. I started my bot. I'm thinking about making some specified version of fuego I think using Fuego for anchor is good idea. One problem is maybe latest Fuego will be overrated from weak Fuego anchor. Can you explain this? I don't understand what you are saying. - Don ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Older archives?
Here's a link to the archives of the computer go mailing list from 1993 - 2003 all in one file: (available in zip, 7-zip and uncompressed) http://www.mediafire.com/?sharekey=5e8b5601844d16558d78a0e5552916099b61fa34587d11e9c95965eaa7bc68bc Ben Shoemaker. - Original Message From: Darren Cook dar...@dcook.org To: computer-go computer-go@computer-go.org Sent: Sunday, May 3, 2009 10:38:44 PM Subject: [computer-go] Older archives? The archives for this list are here: http://computer-go.org/pipermail/computer-go/ But they only go back to August 2003. Does anyone know where the older archives are to be found? Google is coming up blank. And my own archive of selected posts only goes back to 2002 for some reason. I know the list goes back to at least 1990, and has full archives, as I remember spending a good number of hours reading them all after I joined the list in around 1995. I'm interested in tracking down some posts from 1998 to 2000. Thanks, Darren -- Darren Cook, Software Researcher/Developer http://dcook.org/mlsn/ (English-Japanese-German-Chinese-Arabic open source dictionary/semantic network) http://dcook.org/work/ (About me and my work) http://dcook.org/blogs.html (My blogs and articles) ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Older archives?
And just in case, here are some alternate links to the same files: * MailArchive04052003.txt http://www.filefactory.com/file/agf0d17/n/MailArchive04052003_txt * MailArchive04052003.zip http://www.filefactory.com/file/agf0dh4/n/MailArchive04052003_zip * MailArchive04052003.7z http://www.filefactory.com/file/agf0dhe/n/MailArchive04052003_7z - Original Message From: Ben Shoemaker plan...@rocketmail.com To: computer-go computer-go@computer-go.org Sent: Monday, May 4, 2009 9:25:46 AM Subject: Re: [computer-go] Older archives? Here's a link to the archives of the computer go mailing list from 1993 - 2003 all in one file: (available in zip, 7-zip and uncompressed) http://www.mediafire.com/?sharekey=5e8b5601844d16558d78a0e5552916099b61fa34587d11e9c95965eaa7bc68bc Ben Shoemaker. - Original Message From: Darren Cook dar...@dcook.org To: computer-go computer-go@computer-go.org Sent: Sunday, May 3, 2009 10:38:44 PM Subject: [computer-go] Older archives? The archives for this list are here: http://computer-go.org/pipermail/computer-go/ But they only go back to August 2003. Does anyone know where the older archives are to be found? Google is coming up blank. And my own archive of selected posts only goes back to 2002 for some reason. I know the list goes back to at least 1990, and has full archives, as I remember spending a good number of hours reading them all after I joined the list in around 1995. I'm interested in tracking down some posts from 1998 to 2000. Thanks, Darren -- Darren Cook, Software Researcher/Developer http://dcook.org/mlsn/ (English-Japanese-German-Chinese-Arabic open source dictionary/semantic network) http://dcook.org/work/ (About me and my work) http://dcook.org/blogs.html (My blogs and articles) ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Digital Mars
Success! I was able to build on WinXP using Scons and minGW (with gcc4.3.3). Here's what (finally) worked for me: 1. Install Python 2.6.2 http://www.python.org/ftp/python/2.6.2/python-2.6.2.msi 2. Install minGW (using TDM's installer on empty minGW directory) http://downloads.sourceforge.net/tdm-gcc/tdm-mingw-1.902.0-f1.exe 3. Install SCons 1.2.0 http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/scons/scons-1.2.0.win32.exe 4. add C:\Python26\Scripts\ to path (for scons.bat) 5. add C:\MinGW\bin to path (for g++.exe) 6. unpack latest version of libego http://github.com/lukaszlew/libego/zipball/master 7. edit SConstruct (CXX = g++.exe) 8. run scons.bat (from root directory of libego) 9. run build\example\opt\ego.exe (from root directory of libego) 10. report benchmark results The benchmark results for me were: 31.0417 kpps/GHz Hope this helps. Ben. - Original Message From: Łukasz Lew lukasz@gmail.com To: computer-go computer-go@computer-go.org Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2009 3:38:14 AM Subject: Re: [computer-go] Digital Mars Please download newest version, I made some ifdefWIN 32 ... to aid mingw porting. http://github.com/lukaszlew/libego/zipball/master Under linux I can cross compile to windows binary with a following command $ i586-mingw32msvc-g++ -o engine.exe ego/ego.cpp example/main.cpp -O3 -march=native -Iego -fomit-frame-pointer -ffast-math -frename-registers It might just work :) FYI $ i586-mingw32msvc-g++ --version i586-mingw32msvc-g++ (GCC) 4.2.1-sjlj (mingw32-2) And the performance I get is around 32 kpps/GHz Lukasz 2009/4/22 Michael Williams michaelwilliam...@gmail.com: Ok, I have Mingw installed now. That sounds like the way to go. But I still don't know how to compile it :/ According to the SConstruct file, I should be doing something like this to build, but it complains: C:\Libego g++ /Fobuild\ego\dbg\ego.obj /c ego\ego.cpp -DDEBUG -ggdb3 -Wall -Wextra -Wswitch-enum -fno-inline /nologo /Iego g++: /Fobuild\ego\dbg\ego.obj: No such file or directory g++: /c: No such file or directory g++: /nologo: No such file or directory g++: /Iego: No such file or directory In file included from ego\ego.h:27, from ego\ego.cpp:47: ego\gtp.h:73: warning: `class Gtp' has virtual functions but non-virtual destructor In file included from ego\ego.cpp:54: ego\player.cpp: In constructor `Player::Player()': ego\player.cpp:27: warning: converting of negative value `-0x1' to `uint' In file included from ego\ego.cpp:55: ego\color.cpp: In constructor `Color::Color()': ego\color.cpp:27: warning: converting of negative value `-0x1' to `uint' I also tried the build command for the optimized version: C:\Libego g++ /Fobuild\ego\opt\ego.obj /c ego\ego.cpp -DDEBUG -ggdb3 -Wall -Wextra -Wswitch-enum -O3 -march=native -fomit-frame-pointer -ffast-math -frename-registers /nologo /Iego g++: /Fobuild\ego\opt\ego.obj: No such file or directory g++: /c: No such file or directory g++: /nologo: No such file or directory g++: /Iego: No such file or directory ego\ego.cpp:1: error: bad value (native) for -march= switch ego\ego.cpp:1: error: bad value (native) for -mtune= switch Sorry for my ignorance. Łukasz Lew wrote: 2009/4/21 Łukasz Lew lukasz@gmail.com: mingw rules! I compiled libego with it and got a decent 32kpps / GHz ( native g++ was 44kpps / GHz) I used wine to run resulting exe on linux:) Lukasz 2009/4/21 Don Dailey dailey@gmail.com: I use mingw to produce cros platform executables. I can build executables for linux, win32 and win64, which for my chess program is a must since it's 64 bit. - Don On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 5:33 AM, Łukasz Lew lukasz@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 11:23, elife elife2...@gmail.com wrote: I forgot about cygwin indeed. It is a good idea. But can you ran the binary on a system without cygwin? We can run the binary on a system without cygwin if we provide cygwin1.dll. That is great. Another good idea is mingw. BTW I would like to recommend stackoverflow.com for programming questions. I asked this question there http://stackoverflow.com/questions/771756/what-is-the-difference-between-cygwin-and-mingw and got few good answers within a minute. Lukasz ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] a program to enforce a game between two computer ?
Ernest, If your players support GTP, you can automate playing two gtp engines against each other using the twogtp script that comes with the GoGui package. Also, you can use gnugo (with command line options) to estimate the score and/or determine the winner. If you read the gogui-twogtp documentation, I believe you can set gnugo as the referee, and it will automatically score the game. GTP: http://www.lysator.liu.se/~gunnar/gtp/ GoGui:http://sourceforge.net/projects/gogui/ gnugo: http://www.gnu.org/software/gnugo/ twogtp: http://gogui.sourceforge.net/doc/reference-twogtp.html Hope this helps. Ben Shoemaker. From: Ernest Galbrun ernest.galb...@gmail.com To: computer-go@computer-go.org Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2009 3:02:35 PM Subject: [computer-go] a program to enforce a game between two computer ? Hello everyone, I am trying to do some genetic experiment with virtual go players I programmed using basic neuronal network technology. The principle is to test my randomly mutated players against each other and to kill the losers. I have used Opengo library to make my players play against each other, the problem is that opengo does not have any scoring capability, so I am never certain about the result of a game ; and opengo has still some bugs, especially when making computer players play against each other. Could someone tell me what program (if any) I could use to make the players play against each other, given that : - My players dont know anything about the suicide and the ko rule. - Thay can't count the score by themselves. Ernest Galbrun ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Re: OT: Teaching Go (was Re: Disputes under Japanese rules)
- Original Message From: Peter Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] I really can't see in here what we do if I say my stones are alive and you say they're dead, I request resuming the game, you pass (because you don't want to fill in your own territory), and then I pass. The game has ended again, and we still have a dispute. The point of the continuation play is to prove the alive or dead claim. Each side must play out the position until both sides agree on the state of the stones. This may require playing until the stones have two eyes and are unconditionally alive or else playing until the stones are captured and removed from the board. The point of this continuation is not to arrive at a new final board position and score, but to reach an agreement about the status of stones in the original final board position. If the stones were actually unsettled this can get quite messy. Ben. ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] CGOS server boardsize
Don, One possible option would be to have fixed size servers for 9x9 and 19x19--and make the third a variable sized server with each bot stating which sizes it is willing to play leaving it up to the scheduler to set the parameters for each game. That way, no bot would play any sizes it didn't want to, and yet very small and very large sizes could be accommodated for willing bots. Something to consider if a fixed size 13x13 server is underutilized. Ben. - Original Message From: Don Dailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: computer-go computer-go@computer-go.org Sent: Friday, August 1, 2008 6:50:23 PM Subject: Re: [computer-go] CGOS server boardsize I don't seriously plan to do this. However, if I did each bot could choose whether to sit out certain rounds. - Don On Fri, 2008-08-01 at 19:31 -0400, George Dahl wrote: One thing to consider is that for some bots it may be very very hard to change the board size. My (as yet incomplete) bot will be like this. It will require thousands of CPU hours to adapt itself to a new board size so I want to work with as few board sizes as possible since I need to collect training data for each one. - George On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 4:51 PM, Don Dailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How about rotating board sizes? Each round changes the board size. Just an idea. One time long ago I considered making a server where there were no time controls. You just played at whatever pace you choose. The server would try to keep your bot busy playing many different games simultaneously. Whenever your move is complete, the server hands you a new position to compute which likely would be from some other game. Slower bots of course play less games. Scheduling for this is an interesting problem, especially if avoiding mismatches is a priority. - Don On Fri, 2008-08-01 at 13:09 -0700, Christoph Birk wrote: On Fri, 1 Aug 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Something that has worked well in other games would be to change the third CGOS every month. Each month, the parameters would be announced and the CGOS started empty except for the anchor(s). At the end of the month, the bot at the top?would be?the winner. That would allow us to experiment with novel settings like 11x11 boards or 20 seconds per game that might be interesting for a short while but maybe not for long. It can be a way of keeping things fresh and leveling the playing field a little. It also would need a lot more maintenance ... IMHO there would not much to be learned from (eg) 11x11. I think of CGOS as a testing arena, not a monthly tournament to find the best program at some arbitrary setting. Christoph ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Computer Go Forum
Another place to search the archives: http://groups.google.com/group/computer-go-archive - Original Message From: Stuart A. Yeates [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: computer-go computer-go@computer-go.org Sent: Saturday, May 3, 2008 2:49:06 AM Subject: Re: [computer-go] Computer Go Forum There is no forum that I know of. All recent posts are archived at http://computer-go.org/pipermail/computer-go/ They can be searched using google by restricting search to a single domain, a la http://www.google.co.nz/search?as_sitesearch=computer-go.org The other issue is that the answers sometimes change, so its best to just ask your question in the mailing list. cheers stuart On Sat, May 3, 2008 at 6:49 PM, Joshua Shriver [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is there a computer go forum? This mailing list has been great, and may and the most powerful people are here. While email is nice, it would be nice to have a website to post questions, and an easy way to search responses. I really like talkchess.com for chess material, just wish there as a comparible version for Go. -Josh ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] chess/go for handhelds
Ian wrote: I'm surprised that the big names in Go programming a decade ago haven't ported their programs to the small handheld platforms. I only know of AI Go for the Nintendo DS (Many Faces). In the chess arena, Richard Lang ported his last Mephisto program from the 80s (Roma) to the Palm and then to the PocketPC. Chess Genius is now one of the top selling games of any kind on these platforms. The authors of the strong programs Shredder and HIARCS have also followed suit. I would have thought this a vast untapped market, especially in Asia where gadgets are so prevalent. Don wrote: You would think that, but Ogo sold only a few hundred copies, and most of them in Europe and the USA. I don't know if this is true, but I heard that Asian markets are difficult to penetrate and that even with the internet you cannot expect to get many sales. I did get SOME sales from those places, but very few relative to Europe and USA. I used a Palm for many years. I believe Chess Genius was a great success because it was quite fast (nearly instant response time) yet it was strong enough to give the average user a good game. All the Go programs I played on the Palm were either too slow and/or too weak. I believe AIGO for Palm was the most enjoyable overall, but it was quite weak, even for me (I am only 18kyu). (It was also available in a Japanese language version.) I tried OGO, but it was incredibly slow on my Palm, and not significantly stronger than AIGO. The new handhelds (WindowsMobile/PocketPC, Smartphones, and iPhones) can all run versions of GnuGo which I are much faster and stronger than anything that was available for the Palm platform. If they can't already support the latest version of GnuGo, they will soon enough. I just don't see the Palm platform being able to compete, since it is hardly used anymore. Gnugo for WindowsMobile/PocketPC and Smartphone: http://vieka.com/gnugo/ Gnugo for iPhone: http://www.robota.nl/products/iPhone%20iGo.html I say keep developing for the general CPU and wait for the handheld platforms to catch up to your requirements. Ben. Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page. http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] chess/go for handhelds
First of all, I apologize for the one word per line-quoting in my previous message. It apparently has to do with plain/text, Yahoo Mail Beta, and firefox not playing well together. (I have switched back to Yahoo Mail Classic as a work around.) --- Don Dailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In response to Ben's post about Ogo not being significantly stronger, I will present what I have found in my tests. 1. I never tested 19x19, I can't say whether that is true or not. I was most interested in 19x19 performance, but I tested on 9x9 as well. 2. I hand tested 9x9 against AIGO at it's median level (level 3 of 5) and the match was lop-sided in Ogo's favor after 50 games. It would be more lop-sided at level 4 and 5. There is no comparison. I didn't do any head-to-head comparisons. I trust your results. The significant strength I was referring to was the ability to give me an interesting game. Even with handicap stones, neither program was able to do so (I am 18kyu). The real target would of course be a challenging 19x19 game with no handicap. Strength of 10-15kyu would be nice. 1kyu would be awesome. 3. On older palm devices, Ogo would be slow at level 5. But on modern devices with ARM processors Ogo takes about 10 seconds at the highest level for 9x9.That is for a Tungsten T3, some ARM devices are a little slower. (T3 is 400 MHZ) I had a Palm V and a Sony Clie SJ22. I tested at the highest level of each program and found neither to be strong enough to be a challenge, even with handicap stones. If you play both AIGO and Ogo, AIGO may seem stronger because it is pattern based and does't do the MC scoring people hate, but that's just an illusion. People also though Eliza was smart and understood things because it displayed sentences based on simple hard coded patterns. I did play both, and I didn't conclude that AIGO was stronger than Ogo, just that neither was strong enough for me. I did like that AIGO played faster, but I would have probably bought a faster Palm if Ogo were strong enough be challenging on 19x19. There are no Palm programs that actually play very strong, so AIGO is likely a better choice depending on what you expect out of it. It saves games and plays them back and it plays a pretty good move instantly - a nice feature to have in this instant gratification world we live in! Which is why I'm trying to improve Ogo. I simply want it to play a better move faster.If I could make it play significantly faster and significantly better, it would be pretty awesome as a toy program. I totally agree with you. A stronger and faster Ogo would be very nice. However, I think the Palm platform is fairly dead. A smartphone with Linux under the hood (as the iPhone has unix a la OS X) may be an easier and more powerful platform for you to target. It's not clear to me that is even a good idea having a slower high level - because most people are not satisfied to play anything less than the highest level.It's a phenomenon the retail market takes advantage of, many people are reluctant to buy anything less than the top of the line model if they can afford it. Only the best for me! I don't want the dumbed down version! I agree here as well. People want the strongest program they can buy, but they want it to play nearly instantly. Anything more than a few seconds per move is too slow. Most people want their handheld to provide a quick game when they have a few moments to kill. If they had more time, they would play against GnuGo on their PC or a real person. I think your ideas to adapt your program to play better with fewer resources are certainly worth exploring and could lead to some interesting insights applicable to your full-blown program. I certainly don't want to discourage you in your efforts. I just wanted to chime in with my experiences of Go on the Palm. Ben. Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] super-ko
http://senseis.xmp.net/?Superko - Original Message From: Joshua Shriver [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: computer-go computer-go@computer-go.org Sent: Thursday, November 1, 2007 3:08:15 PM Subject: Re: [computer-go] super-ko What is a super-ko? -Josh On 11/1/07, Don Dailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: About once every month or two someone sends me a private email that they have found a ko bug in CGOS and they point me to a game they lost due to superko. So far it's never happened that there was bug - they just didn't understand positional superko. But as you say, it does happen just enough to be annoying if you don't implement it correctly in your program. - Don Christoph Birk wrote: Game 180106 (AyaMC2_1CPU vs ControlBoy) on 9x9-GGOS shows how important it is to implement super-ko. White is so sure of it's win that it misses several oppotunities to finish the deal. I haven't done it myself yet, because it does not happen very ofen, but when it happens like in this game, it's very annoying. Christoph ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Ruby GTP shell
Chris, Thanks for sharing your code. I've been experimenting with go in Python and Ruby. I'm just learning both languages, but eventually, I hope to have well-designed, easily modified, GTP-talking, random players to share with everyone. I may include other languages after that, but the initial plan is Python and Ruby. Ben. - Original Message From: Chris Fant [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: computer-go computer-go@computer-go.org Sent: Friday, October 26, 2007 12:24:48 PM Subject: Re: [computer-go] Ruby GTP shell On 10/24/07, Chris Fant [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Since no one knew of one, I had to write it myself. Hopefully someone else can also make use of it. This is my first Ruby script, so please do criticize so I can learn. Thanks. I got zero responses to this. Anyway, the latest version will be available at: http://fantius.com/Gtp.rb http://fantius.com/GtpTest.rb So far, I'm quite happy with Ruby. ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Some CGOS changes and updated pages
- Original Message From: Don Dailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] cgos-gameinfo 23911 FatMan 1800 ggmc-x86-1.3Q 2008 I think Jason's question is a good one. Is the first player always black or always self? If neither, then color for at least one player should be explicitly specified. (As Jeff stated, there could be a non-engine middleman in the GTP stream.) I would vote for always black first, white second. cgos-gameinfo GAMEID BlackPlayer Rating WhitePlayer Rating cgos-gameinfo 12345 Student 1800 Sensei 3000 Ben. Don't pick lemons. See all the new 2007 cars at Yahoo! Autos. http://autos.yahoo.com/new_cars.html ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Useless moves in the endgame
... Having the floating goal makes it win about 47%, so a slight decrease in strength.. but I'm sure a bit of tweaking may actually make it stronger. The best part is that it now wins by 51pts and loses by 17pts on average. It is said that the game of go rewards balance and penalizes aggression. I wonder if this struggle between wins and territory are in fact a feature of balanced play? It appears that a stronger player results from focusing on winning and not maximizing territory. I find this a very interesting line of research. Ben Shoemaker. __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] 19x19 CGOS?
I vote for adding both 13x13 and 19x19. As long as there is capacity on the server, I don't see any harm in running all three common sizes at the same time. Let the usage dictate how to proceed from there. This may provide valuable feedback that can been incorporated into the new server Don is working on. I think most programs are tuned to one size, either 9x9 or 19x19, but 13x13 provides an interesting intersection of different game playing strategies. Ben Shoemaker. - Original Message From: Chris Fant [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: computer-go computer-go@computer-go.org Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2006 8:36:02 AM Subject: Re: [computer-go] 19x19 CGOS? I vote for 13x13. On 12/12/06, Edward de Grijs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just realize that with 30 minutes for each side, each round will be 1 hour, so for a reasonable rating (which is debatable) of 170 games this will mean that one computer has to compete one complete week continuously. I naturally will use the 19x19 server, but it will be not often that I can play so many games. (Or somebody has a spare networked computer available for me?) Edward. From: Don Dailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], computer-go computer-go@computer-go.org To: computer-go computer-go@computer-go.org Subject: RE: [computer-go] 19x19 CGOS? Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2006 08:20:12 -0500 We have a few proposals. My preference is 13x13 at 20 minutes per game, but I think the idea of having 19x19 is more popular. If we do 19x19 I don't think the monte carlo programs would have much of a chance with current hardware if we use a fast time control.Of course personally I'm trying to encourage the development of new techniques and idea and particularly Monte Carlo although all programs are welcome. So I'm leaning towards 30 minute games at 19x19 but I'm still listening to feedback. - Don _ Geef jouw Hotmail kleur met Windows Live Mail! Stap nu over! http://imagine-windowslive.com/mail/launch/default.aspx?Locale=nl-nl ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ Do you Yahoo!? Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta. http://new.mail.yahoo.com___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
