Re: [computer-go] Re: 9x9 vs 19x19 (was: computer-go Digest)
Le mardi 22 mai 2007 01:52, Dave Dyer a écrit : > > I figured that a credible anchor player for 19x19 might > need a lot of cycles, and need to play a lot of games > at first, so spreading the load would be a good idea. Maybe GNU Go 3.7.10 is _the_ good anchor player for 19x19: - everybody use it at home for tests - at level 10 it is fast, level 8 is slightly weaker but really much faster - it is one of the strongest program available - it is GPL Alain ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
[computer-go] Re: 9x9 vs 19x19 (was: computer-go Digest)
On Mon, 2007-05-21 at 16:52 -0700, Dave Dyer wrote: > I figured that a credible anchor player for 19x19 might > need a lot of cycles, and need to play a lot of games > at first, so spreading the load would be a good idea. Yes, that's true. When the server first goes up, there are no rated players and the games of 2 unrated players have no affect on each other.It takes a long time for ratings to converge in this case. When I started the 9x9 server I seeded it before opening it up to everyone. I played a few hundred matches between the anchor, gnugo and other players I had access to so that there would be reasonable rating pool to start with. It's actually not a big problem if you pick a default rating that is close to the average - unfortunately you don't know what the average will be in advance! I will probably make some stable and common version of gnugo be the anchor for 19x19. If others want to run an instance of it I can set them up as anchors too - I just need to know the names of any bots set up to be anchors. I'll put up a 19x19 version tomorrow on boardspace at 30 minutes per game. - Don ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
[computer-go] Re: 9x9 vs 19x19 (was: computer-go Digest)
I figured that a credible anchor player for 19x19 might need a lot of cycles, and need to play a lot of games at first, so spreading the load would be a good idea. ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Re: 9x9 vs 19x19 (was: computer-go Digest)
On Mon, 2007-05-21 at 14:01 -0700, Dave Dyer wrote: > I suggest that it would be more convenient for everyone > if various sizes of cgos all ran on the same server. If > you want to donate horsepower to the project, a good use > of the resource would be to run "anchorman" type clients. Are you saying that you believe there should be a lot of anchor players? If so 1. If there are too many, it decreases the variety, you might be playing this single opponent a lot more. 2. I think a single anchor works. Having said that, I originally intended for there to be a couple of FatMan clones playing (as anchors) on other peoples computers.That would take the pressure off of me to always keep FatMan running. You wouldn't have to run it all the time, just hopefully a lot of the time. - 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/
[computer-go] Re: 9x9 vs 19x19 (was: computer-go Digest)
I suggest that it would be more convenient for everyone if various sizes of cgos all ran on the same server. If you want to donate horsepower to the project, a good use of the resource would be to run "anchorman" type clients. ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
