Re: [computer-go] Kaori-Crazystone
O Meien 9dan wrote a short column about FIT2008 event. Title is Kanpai monte-carlo. Kanpai means Cheers! and another meaning is complete defeat. (Maybe he uses this from old Japanese hit song monte-carlo de kanpai.) Content is He has thought abstract Area is important for computer Go. Crazy Stone was strong in Yose. If you play 8 handicaps in 19x19, 2 handicaps is proper in 9x9. He thought no komi and playing with white was easy win for him. Afeter 19x19, he thought Crazy Stone was amateur 3dan, but after 9x9, he felt Crazy Stone still had hidden power. Go strength is mainly from close fight. Computers are still weak in 19x19, but maybe it is because computers does not know how to handle it. They have power, some techniques will be needed. Many Go players think top pro never lose to computer within 50 years, but it is maybe too optimistic. X day may come within 10 years. Kanpai monte-carlo (in Japanese) http://taisen.mycom.co.jp/taisen/contents/igo/meien/meien_30.htm Machine trasnlation http://nifty.amikai.com/AmiWeb?ami_url=http://taisen.mycom.co.jp/taisen/contents/igo/meien/meien_30.htmami_src_lang=JAami_tar_lang=ENami_dis=3ami_dict=generalami_font_col=009933 Regards, Hiroshi Yamashita ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Kaori-Crazystone
On Thu, 2008-09-04 at 18:07 +0200, Rémi Coulom wrote: When the playouts evaluate a critical semeai the wrong way, then no supercomputer can help, even at long time control. Semeais require a better algorithm, because no computing power can search them out with a tree, and playouts have to be extremely intelligent in order to evaluate them correctly. Rémi Rémi, I have no doubt that is true and that ways should be found to deal with this. It will probably happen like in chess where at some point players learn how to play against machines and this will suppress the ratings for a while. I fully expect that to happen. This happened around the time that chess playing computers suddenly became a commodity item in the late 70's early 80's approximately. It was almost as if computers stopped improving for 2 or 3 years even though they really were getting better. I don't think this will have any affect on their scalability - it is just a reflection on how difficult go is to play for computers. There were also seemingly insurmountable problems in chess just like this where people said no amount of search will fix it but it didn't stop the very slow but gradual improvement. To this very day it's possible to find chess positions that computers play stupidly, but it's getting really rare. - Don ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: Rating systems (was Re: [computer-go] Kaori-Crazystone)
You would have to ask these questions of Paul. He is an extremely serious and careful person, so while I would find it hard to believe that every person had exactly the same rating down to 0.01, it must have been very close when the entire collection of AGA members was considered. I do not believe that Paul would have allowed the change in the previous rules if the data were not convincing. But I was not involved at the time, so he would know and I only know the story as it was told to me (and how it is being used as the basis for rating computer Go playing programs now). Cheers, David On 5, Sep 2008, at 1:46 AM, Robert Jasiek wrote: David Doshay wrote: Two separate rating tables were kept, one for handicap games and another for non-handicap games. Over time it turned out that the ratings for individuals converged Did they converge for each person individually or converge only for all persons on average? Did the convergence occur for all persons regardless of whether they played Black the more often in handicap games? Did fixed versus free handicaps make a difference? Would altering the handicap density per rank difference / komi system have made a difference? IOW, was the conclusion well justified or misinterpretation? -- robert jasiek ___ 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] Kaori-Crazystone
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Wasn't it today that Crazystone had a match against a professional player? During the FIT2008 conference at Keio University? Does anyone know the result and if the game is available somewhere? Jonas ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ Crazy Stone won, with a 8-stone handicap. It was running on an 8-core PC. The game record is attached. I will set up a web page with more details soon. Rémi FIT2008_aoba_kaori_VS_CS.sgf Description: application/go-sgf ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Kaori-Crazystone
Congratulations! I'm dying for details! What was the time limit? Did the game end on time or by resignation at move 179? The pro was Aoba Kaori, yes? Terry McIntyre [EMAIL PROTECTED] Go is very hard. The more I learn about it, the less I know. -Jie Li, 9 dan - Original Message From: Rémi Coulom [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: computer-go computer-go@computer-go.org Sent: Thursday, September 4, 2008 3:56:05 AM Subject: Re: [computer-go] Kaori-Crazystone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Wasn't it today that Crazystone had a match against a professional player? During the FIT2008 conference at Keio University? Does anyone know the result and if the game is available somewhere? Jonas ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ Crazy Stone won, with a 8-stone handicap. It was running on an 8-core PC. The game record is attached. I will set up a web page with more details soon. Rémi ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Kaori-Crazystone
terry mcintyre wrote: Congratulations! Thanks. I'm dying for details! What was the time limit? The organizers asked that the program should play at a constant time (30 second) per move. The sgf file contains time stamps (you can see the time with gogui, for instance). I don't know what was her time control, but she apparently played at the same pace as the program. Did the game end on time or by resignation at move 179? She resigned. The pro was Aoba Kaori, yes? Yes. The only other information I have about the match are these pages in Japanese: https://secure1.gakkai-web.net/gakkai/fit/program/html/event/event.html#6 http://www.ipsj.or.jp/10jigyo/fit/fit2008/events.html#1-4-1 I hope the organizers can send me some photos tomorrow. Then I will set up a web page and tell the list. Rémi ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Kaori-Crazystone
Congratulations, Remi! I just returned from FIT2008. This was first official professional vs. computer game in Japan. I added some comments in sgf. These game comments are stated by O Meien professional 9dan. Aoba 4dan's comment after game. My guess was soft was strong, but something is different. I think I played well partially, upper left and right side. I think it is even game when I get one stone on bottom. Crazy Stone played yose correctly, amateur 5dan level. Tei Meikou pro 9dan said, Crazy Stone is much stronger than last year's UEC cup. After this game, O Meien 9dan played with Crazy Stone on 9x9. Komi was 0.5 and Meien 9dan played White. Crazy Stone won. This was very exciting game. I put some photos. http://www.yss-aya.com/photo/20080904fit/index01.html FIT2008 Computer Go Frontier (in Japanese) https://secure1.gakkai-web.net/gakkai/fit/program/html/event/event.html#6 Aoba Kaori 4dan http://www.nihonkiin.or.jp/player/htm/ki000343.htm O Meien 9dan http://www.nihonkiin.or.jp/player/htm/ki66.htm (;FF[3]GM[1]SZ[19]HA[8] PB[Crazy Stone] PW[Aoba Kaori] DT[2008-09-04] RE[B+R] KM[0.5] RU[Japanese]PC[Keio University, Shonan-Fujisawa, Kanagawa Japan]EV[FIT2008] AB[dd][jd][pd][dj][pj][dp][jp][pp] ;W[dm];B[gk];W[gp];B[gn];W[eo];B[ep];W[fo];B[jn];W[dg];B[fg] ;W[cd];B[cc];W[de];B[ce];W[bd];B[ee];W[df];B[ec];W[bc];B[nd] ;W[qn];B[on];W[om];B[nm];W[ol];B[nl];W[ok];B[mi];W[nk];B[mk] ;W[nn];B[pn];W[mj];B[lj];W[ml];B[nj];W[mm]C[Tortoise shell is worth 60 points. Pon-nuki is worth 30 points. So white gets 30 points.] ;B[np];W[oj];B[oi];W[pi]C[I like M-9.] ;B[ph];W[qi];B[qm];W[oh];B[ni] C[They say Crazy Stone resign 20% winning rate. It's a good loser. I never resign even if 0%.] ;W[pg]C[dreamy move. But black still leads 30 points.] ;B[qj];W[qh]C[Black should play R-8. Q10 is pivotal stones. ] ;B[ng]C[White can lay waste to the upper side. Black can not keep all. ] ;W[ql];B[qo];W[fd];B[fe];W[ed];B[dc];W[fc]C[Black B-18, white A-18 is difficult.] ;B[hd]C[Black could live at least. It looks finally even.] ;W[eb]C[Will white lose totally? I can't imagine :-)] ;B[bo];W[do];B[cp];W[fq];B[cl];W[dr];B[cm];W[iq];B[jq];W[jr] ;B[kr];W[ir];B[rl];W[qk];B[kl];W[ge];B[hg]C[Maybe white's next move is 33(R-17).] ;W[qc];B[qd];W[pb];B[pc];W[rb];B[rc];W[qb];B[cr];W[lr];B[rk]C[It is appreciate. White can play S-6 now.] ;W[rj];B[gf];W[nb];B[nc]C[About 100 moves is left. Black will lose 20 points after this.] ;W[mb];B[lc]C[L-3 is solid.] ;W[kq]C[White can win. But it is really difficult now.] ;B[er]C[Even O-2 is full stomach.] ;W[rn]C[Next move will R-3. I like O-2.] ;B[rm];W[qq];B[ro];W[or];B[nr];W[pr];B[gd];W[gb];B[gc];W[fb] ;B[kp];W[lq];B[oq];W[rr]C[Black G-2 is strong. Still difficult game.] ;B[ch];W[dh];B[di];W[eh]C[It looks close game. But I guess white will win.] ;B[bg];W[gi];B[hi];W[jm];B[km];W[hh];B[gh];W[hj];B[ih];W[gj] ;B[fi];W[fj];B[ij]C[Black stops here. Ha-ha-ha.] ;W[hk]C[Now white can connect.] ;B[dl];W[ik];B[jk];W[jj];B[ii];W[mc]C[I like L-17 tuke.] ;B[md];W[kc];B[ld];W[lb];B[be];W[cg];B[bh];W[kd];B[ke];W[jc] ;B[ic]C[White will lose on territory if nothing is done.] ;W[je];B[id];W[hm];B[fk];W[in]C[To win, white must kill O-13 and so on. It is not dream.] ;B[jl];W[fm]C[White should play J-7.] ;B[im];W[hn];B[ob]C[Black gives a point after a long time.] ;W[oa];B[hl];W[ei];B[ej];W[fh]C[It looks a bit bad. White is not enough, she needs speculative play.] ;B[ib];W[rd]C[If black gets 3 moku, it is over. R-15 cut is small.] ;B[re];W[sc];B[kb];W[nh];B[mh];W[nf];B[og];W[qe];B[pf];W[qf] ;B[il];W[fi];B[sj];W[ri];B[ph];W[oh];B[gm]) This 9x9 game record is maybe not correct. I inputed manually. (; GM[1]SZ[9] PB[Crazy Stone] PW[O Meien] DT[2008-09-04] RE[W+3.5] KM[0.5]TM[600]RU[Japanese] ;B[ee];W[eg];B[ec];W[ge];B[df];W[dg];B[cg];W[cf];B[ce];W[bf] ;B[ch];W[be];B[ff];W[fg];B[gf];W[gg];B[cc];W[bd];B[hg];W[hh] ;B[hf];W[ef];B[de];W[fe];B[ih];W[he];B[gh];W[hi];B[gi];W[if] ;B[ii];W[hh];B[hi];W[ie];B[dh];W[ig];B[eh];W[hh];B[bc];W[bg] ;B[bh];W[fb];B[fc];W[gc];B[eb];W[fh];B[gb];W[hb];B[fa];W[ei] ;B[ah];W[di];B[cd];W[ci];B[ad];W[bi];B[ae];W[ha];B[hc];W[gd] ;B[ib];W[hd];B[ga];W[ic];B[af];W[fd];B[ed];W[fi];B[ag];W[ai] ) Regards, Hiroshi Yamashita ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Kaori-Crazystone
It's difficult for me to understand this due to different ranking systems and pro ratings vs amateur ratings. I see here listed as a 4 dan player on this page: http://www.nihonkiin.or.jp/player/htm/ki000343.htm Is that 4 dan pro? My understanding is something like this: kyu player are casual players (or weak tournament players) low dan players are something like advanced amateurs or experts and weak masters in chess. Pro's are like super high dan players and there is not very much difference between ranks compared to regular dan players. I have heard that a 1d professional will beat a 9d professional with 3 or 4 stones. So a 1d pro is something like a 7 or 8d+ amateur? Is this all roughly correct? So I assume that Aoba Kaori is a 4d professional? That would relate to something in the ballpark of 9 or 10d amateur if there were such a thing. And with 8 stones handicap, this implies that CrazyStone did what a 2d+ would have done, or it is weaker than 2d but got lucky. So it's performance rating for that one game is lower bounded at around 1 or 2 dan. Since it won the game we could pick 2 dan as a better lower bound guess although since it won we do not have a reasonable upper bound guess on it's performance except our own credulity. Does what I said make any sense? I am not a go player and I'm not very comfortable with this guesswork. In chess, if you beat a player I am used to thinking in terms of setting a performance rating of around 400 ELO higher for that one game. I know this is not precise, but I also think of 400 ELO subtracted from the player you beat as a kind of estimated lower bound on your strength. If you beat a 2500 ELO chess player, it's a relatively safe bet that you are at least 2100 ELO in strength although technically there is a chance you could lose to anybody, even a random move generator. I know this isn't precise language, but how many ranks would give us around 90 - 95% confidence of superiority?If I beat a 5 dan player, could you say that it's very likely I am at least 3 dan in strength? I'm thinking that if we estimate Aoba at 10d amateur and CrazyStone wins with 8 stone handicap, it is roughly equivalent to beating a 2d player without handicap and that we can subtract 2 stones to say that with pretty high confidence CrazyStone is playing at least 1 kyu (but that's it's much more likely Crazy Stone is stronger than this - after all it performed in this one game at least as well as 2d player.) - Don On Thu, 2008-09-04 at 16:28 +0200, Rémi Coulom wrote: terry mcintyre wrote: Congratulations! Thanks. I'm dying for details! What was the time limit? The organizers asked that the program should play at a constant time (30 second) per move. The sgf file contains time stamps (you can see the time with gogui, for instance). I don't know what was her time control, but she apparently played at the same pace as the program. Did the game end on time or by resignation at move 179? She resigned. The pro was Aoba Kaori, yes? Yes. The only other information I have about the match are these pages in Japanese: https://secure1.gakkai-web.net/gakkai/fit/program/html/event/event.html#6 http://www.ipsj.or.jp/10jigyo/fit/fit2008/events.html#1-4-1 I hope the organizers can send me some photos tomorrow. Then I will set up a web page and tell the list. Rémi ___ 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] Kaori-Crazystone
I meant to add that we cannot calculate an upper bound on it's strength since there was only 1 game and it was a win. What I'm trying to determine is if we can say with a high degree of confidence yet that computers have achieved the 1 dan level? This has been kind of a holy grail of computer go in my opinion - even if it wasn't directly articulated (or perhaps it was?) - Don On Thu, 2008-09-04 at 11:38 -0400, Don Dailey wrote: It's difficult for me to understand this due to different ranking systems and pro ratings vs amateur ratings. I see here listed as a 4 dan player on this page: http://www.nihonkiin.or.jp/player/htm/ki000343.htm Is that 4 dan pro? My understanding is something like this: kyu player are casual players (or weak tournament players) low dan players are something like advanced amateurs or experts and weak masters in chess. Pro's are like super high dan players and there is not very much difference between ranks compared to regular dan players. I have heard that a 1d professional will beat a 9d professional with 3 or 4 stones. So a 1d pro is something like a 7 or 8d+ amateur? Is this all roughly correct? So I assume that Aoba Kaori is a 4d professional? That would relate to something in the ballpark of 9 or 10d amateur if there were such a thing. And with 8 stones handicap, this implies that CrazyStone did what a 2d+ would have done, or it is weaker than 2d but got lucky. So it's performance rating for that one game is lower bounded at around 1 or 2 dan. Since it won the game we could pick 2 dan as a better lower bound guess although since it won we do not have a reasonable upper bound guess on it's performance except our own credulity. Does what I said make any sense? I am not a go player and I'm not very comfortable with this guesswork. In chess, if you beat a player I am used to thinking in terms of setting a performance rating of around 400 ELO higher for that one game. I know this is not precise, but I also think of 400 ELO subtracted from the player you beat as a kind of estimated lower bound on your strength. If you beat a 2500 ELO chess player, it's a relatively safe bet that you are at least 2100 ELO in strength although technically there is a chance you could lose to anybody, even a random move generator. I know this isn't precise language, but how many ranks would give us around 90 - 95% confidence of superiority?If I beat a 5 dan player, could you say that it's very likely I am at least 3 dan in strength? I'm thinking that if we estimate Aoba at 10d amateur and CrazyStone wins with 8 stone handicap, it is roughly equivalent to beating a 2d player without handicap and that we can subtract 2 stones to say that with pretty high confidence CrazyStone is playing at least 1 kyu (but that's it's much more likely Crazy Stone is stronger than this - after all it performed in this one game at least as well as 2d player.) - Don On Thu, 2008-09-04 at 16:28 +0200, Rémi Coulom wrote: terry mcintyre wrote: Congratulations! Thanks. I'm dying for details! What was the time limit? The organizers asked that the program should play at a constant time (30 second) per move. The sgf file contains time stamps (you can see the time with gogui, for instance). I don't know what was her time control, but she apparently played at the same pace as the program. Did the game end on time or by resignation at move 179? She resigned. The pro was Aoba Kaori, yes? Yes. The only other information I have about the match are these pages in Japanese: https://secure1.gakkai-web.net/gakkai/fit/program/html/event/event.html#6 http://www.ipsj.or.jp/10jigyo/fit/fit2008/events.html#1-4-1 I hope the organizers can send me some photos tomorrow. Then I will set up a web page and tell the list. Rémi ___ 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] Kaori-Crazystone
I'm excited to see a computer reach 1d as well. For me I'm waiting to see a bot hold a 1d rating consistently on kgs. Right now CrazyStone has been rated 1d briefly, but hasn't been able to maintain it. It's currently 1k. I put a small table of the progress of a few bot's ratings on kgs at http://senseis.xmp.net/?KGSBotRatings I would like to see MogoTiTan play many rated games on KGS and see how it does there. Anyone have a few million dollars lying around to sponsor this? :) On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 10:48 AM, Don Dailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I meant to add that we cannot calculate an upper bound on it's strength since there was only 1 game and it was a win. What I'm trying to determine is if we can say with a high degree of confidence yet that computers have achieved the 1 dan level? This has been kind of a holy grail of computer go in my opinion - even if it wasn't directly articulated (or perhaps it was?) - Don On Thu, 2008-09-04 at 11:38 -0400, Don Dailey wrote: It's difficult for me to understand this due to different ranking systems and pro ratings vs amateur ratings. I see here listed as a 4 dan player on this page: http://www.nihonkiin.or.jp/player/htm/ki000343.htm Is that 4 dan pro? My understanding is something like this: kyu player are casual players (or weak tournament players) low dan players are something like advanced amateurs or experts and weak masters in chess. Pro's are like super high dan players and there is not very much difference between ranks compared to regular dan players. I have heard that a 1d professional will beat a 9d professional with 3 or 4 stones. So a 1d pro is something like a 7 or 8d+ amateur? Is this all roughly correct? So I assume that Aoba Kaori is a 4d professional? That would relate to something in the ballpark of 9 or 10d amateur if there were such a thing. And with 8 stones handicap, this implies that CrazyStone did what a 2d+ would have done, or it is weaker than 2d but got lucky. So it's performance rating for that one game is lower bounded at around 1 or 2 dan. Since it won the game we could pick 2 dan as a better lower bound guess although since it won we do not have a reasonable upper bound guess on it's performance except our own credulity. Does what I said make any sense? I am not a go player and I'm not very comfortable with this guesswork. In chess, if you beat a player I am used to thinking in terms of setting a performance rating of around 400 ELO higher for that one game. I know this is not precise, but I also think of 400 ELO subtracted from the player you beat as a kind of estimated lower bound on your strength. If you beat a 2500 ELO chess player, it's a relatively safe bet that you are at least 2100 ELO in strength although technically there is a chance you could lose to anybody, even a random move generator. I know this isn't precise language, but how many ranks would give us around 90 - 95% confidence of superiority?If I beat a 5 dan player, could you say that it's very likely I am at least 3 dan in strength? I'm thinking that if we estimate Aoba at 10d amateur and CrazyStone wins with 8 stone handicap, it is roughly equivalent to beating a 2d player without handicap and that we can subtract 2 stones to say that with pretty high confidence CrazyStone is playing at least 1 kyu (but that's it's much more likely Crazy Stone is stronger than this - after all it performed in this one game at least as well as 2d player.) - Don On Thu, 2008-09-04 at 16:28 +0200, Rémi Coulom wrote: terry mcintyre wrote: Congratulations! Thanks. I'm dying for details! What was the time limit? The organizers asked that the program should play at a constant time (30 second) per move. The sgf file contains time stamps (you can see the time with gogui, for instance). I don't know what was her time control, but she apparently played at the same pace as the program. Did the game end on time or by resignation at move 179? She resigned. The pro was Aoba Kaori, yes? Yes. The only other information I have about the match are these pages in Japanese: https://secure1.gakkai-web.net/gakkai/fit/program/html/event/event.html#6 http://www.ipsj.or.jp/10jigyo/fit/fit2008/events.html#1-4-1 I hope the organizers can send me some photos tomorrow. Then I will set up a web page and tell the list. Rémi ___ 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
Re: [computer-go] Kaori-Crazystone
Don Dailey wrote: I'm thinking that if we estimate Aoba at 10d amateur and CrazyStone wins with 8 stone handicap, it is roughly equivalent to beating a 2d player without handicap and that we can subtract 2 stones to say that with pretty high confidence CrazyStone is playing at least 1 kyu (but that's it's much more likely Crazy Stone is stronger than this - after all it performed in this one game at least as well as 2d player.) Hi Don, Crazy Stone played a few games on KGS, and has a strong 1k rank there. When watching the games, I feel that its level is sometimes very high, sometimes very low. If there is a semeai on the board that the playouts evaluate wrongly, then its playing style is absolutely horrible (much lower than 1k). Otherwise, it plays very strong (stronger than 1k). Well, I am only 5k, so I cannot really tell. But when I see the horrors it plays in some games, I suppose it must play much stronger than 1k in some other games in order to get a rating of 1k. Look for instance at these two games: a win: http://files.gokgs.com/games/2008/8/23/CrazyStone-mandelbrot.sgf a loss: http://files.gokgs.com/games/2008/8/23/CrazyStone-beoren.sgf (with comments of the opponents at the end) I have the feeling that MoGo has the same problem. It seems to be typical. Against Kim Myung Wan, it was very clear. In the games it lost, there were big semeais on the board. And MoGo played horribly. In my opinion, this is what explains the apparent difference of level between the blitz and the slow game. Not the time control. Of course, this is just a guess. Maybe members of the MoGo team can confirm/infirm this. When the playouts evaluate a critical semeai the wrong way, then no supercomputer can help, even at long time control. Semeais require a better algorithm, because no computing power can search them out with a tree, and playouts have to be extremely intelligent in order to evaluate them correctly. Rémi ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Kaori-Crazystone
Andy wrote: I'm excited to see a computer reach 1d as well. For me I'm waiting to see a bot hold a 1d rating consistently on kgs. Right now CrazyStone has been rated 1d briefly, but hasn't been able to maintain it. It's currently 1k. I put a small table of the progress of a few bot's ratings on kgs at http://senseis.xmp.net/?KGSBotRatings I would like to see MogoTiTan play many rated games on KGS and see how it does there. Anyone have a few million dollars lying around to sponsor this? :) Leela is becoming strong. It has reached 1k now. Rémi ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Kaori-Crazystone
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Don Dailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes I meant to add that we cannot calculate an upper bound on it's strength since there was only 1 game and it was a win. What I'm trying to determine is if we can say with a high degree of confidence yet that computers have achieved the 1 dan level? This has been kind of a holy grail of computer go in my opinion - even if it wasn't directly articulated (or perhaps it was?) My understanding of the rating system: Amateur grades, from 20 kyu and below, up to amateur 6 dan, are one stone apart. Pro 1 dan is about equivalent to amateur 7 dan. Pro grades are about a third of a stone apart. This all varies a bit from country to country: for example a European amateur 3 dan is stronger than a Japanese amateur 3 dan. As for 1 dan being a kind of holy grail: The Ing prize, worth over US$1,000,000, was for beating inseis, that is trainee professionals, who would have a strength of around amateur 7 dan or maybe slightly below. So beating a [pro] 1-dan became a target. This has been misunderstood by some as amateur 1-dan. I believe that MoGo, running on enough processors, is now stronger than a European amateur 1 dan who has not played it before or who has not learned to handle its unusual style. I cannot guess how it would do in a nine-game match against a typical European amateur 1 dan. Nick - Don On Thu, 2008-09-04 at 11:38 -0400, Don Dailey wrote: It's difficult for me to understand this due to different ranking systems and pro ratings vs amateur ratings. I see here listed as a 4 dan player on this page: http://www.nihonkiin.or.jp/player/htm/ki000343.htm Is that 4 dan pro? My understanding is something like this: kyu player are casual players (or weak tournament players) low dan players are something like advanced amateurs or experts and weak masters in chess. Pro's are like super high dan players and there is not very much difference between ranks compared to regular dan players. I have heard that a 1d professional will beat a 9d professional with 3 or 4 stones. So a 1d pro is something like a 7 or 8d+ amateur? Is this all roughly correct? So I assume that Aoba Kaori is a 4d professional? That would relate to something in the ballpark of 9 or 10d amateur if there were such a thing. And with 8 stones handicap, this implies that CrazyStone did what a 2d+ would have done, or it is weaker than 2d but got lucky. So it's performance rating for that one game is lower bounded at around 1 or 2 dan. Since it won the game we could pick 2 dan as a better lower bound guess although since it won we do not have a reasonable upper bound guess on it's performance except our own credulity. Does what I said make any sense? I am not a go player and I'm not very comfortable with this guesswork. In chess, if you beat a player I am used to thinking in terms of setting a performance rating of around 400 ELO higher for that one game. I know this is not precise, but I also think of 400 ELO subtracted from the player you beat as a kind of estimated lower bound on your strength. If you beat a 2500 ELO chess player, it's a relatively safe bet that you are at least 2100 ELO in strength although technically there is a chance you could lose to anybody, even a random move generator. I know this isn't precise language, but how many ranks would give us around 90 - 95% confidence of superiority?If I beat a 5 dan player, could you say that it's very likely I am at least 3 dan in strength? I'm thinking that if we estimate Aoba at 10d amateur and CrazyStone wins with 8 stone handicap, it is roughly equivalent to beating a 2d player without handicap and that we can subtract 2 stones to say that with pretty high confidence CrazyStone is playing at least 1 kyu (but that's it's much more likely Crazy Stone is stronger than this - after all it performed in this one game at least as well as 2d player.) - Don On Thu, 2008-09-04 at 16:28 +0200, Rémi Coulom wrote: terry mcintyre wrote: Congratulations! Thanks. I'm dying for details! What was the time limit? The organizers asked that the program should play at a constant time (30 second) per move. The sgf file contains time stamps (you can see the time with gogui, for instance). I don't know what was her time control, but she apparently played at the same pace as the program. Did the game end on time or by resignation at move 179? She resigned. The pro was Aoba Kaori, yes? Yes. The only other information I have about the match are these pages in Japanese: https://secure1.gakkai-web.net/gakkai/fit/program/html/event/event.html#6 http://www.ipsj.or.jp/10jigyo/fit/fit2008/events.html#1-4-1 I hope the organizers can send me some photos tomorrow. Then I will set up a web page and tell the list. Rémi ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org
Re: [computer-go] Kaori-Crazystone
On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 11:09 AM, Rémi Coulom [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote: Andy wrote: I'm excited to see a computer reach 1d as well. For me I'm waiting to see a bot hold a 1d rating consistently on kgs. Right now CrazyStone has been rated 1d briefly, but hasn't been able to maintain it. It's currently 1k. I put a small table of the progress of a few bot's ratings on kgs at http://senseis.xmp.net/?KGSBotRatings I would like to see MogoTiTan play many rated games on KGS and see how it does there. Anyone have a few million dollars lying around to sponsor this? :) Leela is becoming strong. It has reached 1k now. Rémi Thanks, I have updated http://senseis.xmp.net/?KGSBotRatings - Andy ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Kaori-Crazystone
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Rémi Coulom [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes Don Dailey wrote: I'm thinking that if we estimate Aoba at 10d amateur and CrazyStone wins with 8 stone handicap, it is roughly equivalent to beating a 2d player without handicap and that we can subtract 2 stones to say that with pretty high confidence CrazyStone is playing at least 1 kyu (but that's it's much more likely Crazy Stone is stronger than this - after all it performed in this one game at least as well as 2d player.) Hi Don, Crazy Stone played a few games on KGS, and has a strong 1k rank there. When watching the games, I feel that its level is sometimes very high, sometimes very low. If there is a semeai on the board that the playouts evaluate wrongly, then its playing style is absolutely horrible (much lower than 1k). Otherwise, it plays very strong (stronger than 1k). Well, I am only 5k, so I cannot really tell. But when I see the horrors it plays in some games, I suppose it must play much stronger than 1k in some other games in order to get a rating of 1k. Look for instance at these two games: a win: http://files.gokgs.com/games/2008/8/23/CrazyStone-mandelbrot.sgf When mandelbrot resigns, saying I was pwned, it appears to me that he is ahead. If he plays at q11 instead of resigning, I think he can kill Crazy Stone's s12 group - but it's difficult, and I'm not sure. Nick a loss: http://files.gokgs.com/games/2008/8/23/CrazyStone-beoren.sgf (with comments of the opponents at the end) I have the feeling that MoGo has the same problem. It seems to be typical. Against Kim Myung Wan, it was very clear. In the games it lost, there were big semeais on the board. And MoGo played horribly. In my opinion, this is what explains the apparent difference of level between the blitz and the slow game. Not the time control. Of course, this is just a guess. Maybe members of the MoGo team can confirm/infirm this. When the playouts evaluate a critical semeai the wrong way, then no supercomputer can help, even at long time control. Semeais require a better algorithm, because no computing power can search them out with a tree, and playouts have to be extremely intelligent in order to evaluate them correctly. Rémi ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ -- Nick Wedd[EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Kaori-Crazystone
Nick Wedd wrote: When mandelbrot resigns, saying I was pwned, it appears to me that he is ahead. If he plays at q11 instead of resigning, I think he can kill Crazy Stone's s12 group - but it's difficult, and I'm not sure. Bots are strong at psychological wins :-) Rémi ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Kaori-Crazystone
1d (amateur) is a kind of holy grail for amateurs, because it separates fairly serious players from people just messing around, so seeing a program at that level on a 19x19 board at reasonable (non-blitz) time controls is quite impressive. 1p is generally stronger than all but a small handful of amateurs, so can be thought of as =7d (amateur). beating a 1p in a zero-handicap game would be a really, really big deal for a computer player. $1M prize was well-considered, from that point of view. i think that the insurance value of such a proposition is still pretty low. s. On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 11:38 AM, Don Dailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's difficult for me to understand this due to different ranking systems and pro ratings vs amateur ratings. I see here listed as a 4 dan player on this page: http://www.nihonkiin.or.jp/player/htm/ki000343.htm Is that 4 dan pro? My understanding is something like this: kyu player are casual players (or weak tournament players) low dan players are something like advanced amateurs or experts and weak masters in chess. Pro's are like super high dan players and there is not very much difference between ranks compared to regular dan players. I have heard that a 1d professional will beat a 9d professional with 3 or 4 stones. So a 1d pro is something like a 7 or 8d+ amateur? Is this all roughly correct? So I assume that Aoba Kaori is a 4d professional? That would relate to something in the ballpark of 9 or 10d amateur if there were such a thing. And with 8 stones handicap, this implies that CrazyStone did what a 2d+ would have done, or it is weaker than 2d but got lucky. So it's performance rating for that one game is lower bounded at around 1 or 2 dan. Since it won the game we could pick 2 dan as a better lower bound guess although since it won we do not have a reasonable upper bound guess on it's performance except our own credulity. Does what I said make any sense? I am not a go player and I'm not very comfortable with this guesswork. In chess, if you beat a player I am used to thinking in terms of setting a performance rating of around 400 ELO higher for that one game. I know this is not precise, but I also think of 400 ELO subtracted from the player you beat as a kind of estimated lower bound on your strength. If you beat a 2500 ELO chess player, it's a relatively safe bet that you are at least 2100 ELO in strength although technically there is a chance you could lose to anybody, even a random move generator. I know this isn't precise language, but how many ranks would give us around 90 - 95% confidence of superiority?If I beat a 5 dan player, could you say that it's very likely I am at least 3 dan in strength? I'm thinking that if we estimate Aoba at 10d amateur and CrazyStone wins with 8 stone handicap, it is roughly equivalent to beating a 2d player without handicap and that we can subtract 2 stones to say that with pretty high confidence CrazyStone is playing at least 1 kyu (but that's it's much more likely Crazy Stone is stronger than this - after all it performed in this one game at least as well as 2d player.) - Don On Thu, 2008-09-04 at 16:28 +0200, Rémi Coulom wrote: terry mcintyre wrote: Congratulations! Thanks. I'm dying for details! What was the time limit? The organizers asked that the program should play at a constant time (30 second) per move. The sgf file contains time stamps (you can see the time with gogui, for instance). I don't know what was her time control, but she apparently played at the same pace as the program. Did the game end on time or by resignation at move 179? She resigned. The pro was Aoba Kaori, yes? Yes. The only other information I have about the match are these pages in Japanese: https://secure1.gakkai-web.net/gakkai/fit/program/html/event/event.html#6 http://www.ipsj.or.jp/10jigyo/fit/fit2008/events.html#1-4-1 I hope the organizers can send me some photos tomorrow. Then I will set up a web page and tell the list. Rémi ___ 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] Kaori-Crazystone
in fact, if you made a betting game out of it, and formed a pool that would go to anyone willing to take the challenge, i think that you'd find that the ratio of dollars against to dollars for would be a fairly accurate depiction of the strength increase over time. the ratio would likely lag behind the reality, but with money involved, people might tend to think more carefully about the situation. i think that people have set up such market indicators for all kinds of things just to see how accurately they predict reality. s. On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 12:38 PM, steve uurtamo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 1d (amateur) is a kind of holy grail for amateurs, because it separates fairly serious players from people just messing around, so seeing a program at that level on a 19x19 board at reasonable (non-blitz) time controls is quite impressive. 1p is generally stronger than all but a small handful of amateurs, so can be thought of as =7d (amateur). beating a 1p in a zero-handicap game would be a really, really big deal for a computer player. $1M prize was well-considered, from that point of view. i think that the insurance value of such a proposition is still pretty low. s. On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 11:38 AM, Don Dailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's difficult for me to understand this due to different ranking systems and pro ratings vs amateur ratings. I see here listed as a 4 dan player on this page: http://www.nihonkiin.or.jp/player/htm/ki000343.htm Is that 4 dan pro? My understanding is something like this: kyu player are casual players (or weak tournament players) low dan players are something like advanced amateurs or experts and weak masters in chess. Pro's are like super high dan players and there is not very much difference between ranks compared to regular dan players. I have heard that a 1d professional will beat a 9d professional with 3 or 4 stones. So a 1d pro is something like a 7 or 8d+ amateur? Is this all roughly correct? So I assume that Aoba Kaori is a 4d professional? That would relate to something in the ballpark of 9 or 10d amateur if there were such a thing. And with 8 stones handicap, this implies that CrazyStone did what a 2d+ would have done, or it is weaker than 2d but got lucky. So it's performance rating for that one game is lower bounded at around 1 or 2 dan. Since it won the game we could pick 2 dan as a better lower bound guess although since it won we do not have a reasonable upper bound guess on it's performance except our own credulity. Does what I said make any sense? I am not a go player and I'm not very comfortable with this guesswork. In chess, if you beat a player I am used to thinking in terms of setting a performance rating of around 400 ELO higher for that one game. I know this is not precise, but I also think of 400 ELO subtracted from the player you beat as a kind of estimated lower bound on your strength. If you beat a 2500 ELO chess player, it's a relatively safe bet that you are at least 2100 ELO in strength although technically there is a chance you could lose to anybody, even a random move generator. I know this isn't precise language, but how many ranks would give us around 90 - 95% confidence of superiority?If I beat a 5 dan player, could you say that it's very likely I am at least 3 dan in strength? I'm thinking that if we estimate Aoba at 10d amateur and CrazyStone wins with 8 stone handicap, it is roughly equivalent to beating a 2d player without handicap and that we can subtract 2 stones to say that with pretty high confidence CrazyStone is playing at least 1 kyu (but that's it's much more likely Crazy Stone is stronger than this - after all it performed in this one game at least as well as 2d player.) - Don On Thu, 2008-09-04 at 16:28 +0200, Rémi Coulom wrote: terry mcintyre wrote: Congratulations! Thanks. I'm dying for details! What was the time limit? The organizers asked that the program should play at a constant time (30 second) per move. The sgf file contains time stamps (you can see the time with gogui, for instance). I don't know what was her time control, but she apparently played at the same pace as the program. Did the game end on time or by resignation at move 179? She resigned. The pro was Aoba Kaori, yes? Yes. The only other information I have about the match are these pages in Japanese: https://secure1.gakkai-web.net/gakkai/fit/program/html/event/event.html#6 http://www.ipsj.or.jp/10jigyo/fit/fit2008/events.html#1-4-1 I hope the organizers can send me some photos tomorrow. Then I will set up a web page and tell the list. Rémi ___ 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
Re: [computer-go] Kaori-Crazystone
On Thu, 2008-09-04 at 17:09 +0100, Nick Wedd wrote: As for 1 dan being a kind of holy grail: The Ing prize, worth over US$1,000,000, was for beating inseis, that is trainee professionals, who would have a strength of around amateur 7 dan or maybe slightly below. So beating a [pro] 1-dan became a target. This has been misunderstood by some as amateur 1-dan. I never associated the Ing prize with this goal of achieving 1 dan. Probably any milestone easily expressed becomes a kind of holy grail but I cannot read peoples minds.In my own mind it seems to me that most guns have been aimed at getting out of the beginner kyu ranks. But of course, as I mentioned, most of this cannot be pinned down accurately. At any point in time, I imagine that most people are focused primarily on the next milestone.If we reach 1d amateur, surely the focus will shift to 1d professional, then beating the world champion, etc. - Don ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Kaori-Crazystone
Rémi Coulom wrote: I would like to see MogoTiTan play many rated games on KGS and see how it does there. Anyone have a few million dollars lying around to sponsor this? :) Leela is becoming strong. It has reached 1k now. The gold medal in Beijing will not go to France without a fight! -- GCP ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Kaori-Crazystone
Don Dailey: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: It's difficult for me to understand this due to different ranking systems and pro ratings vs amateur ratings. I see here listed as a 4 dan player on this page: http://www.nihonkiin.or.jp/player/htm/ki000343.htm Is that 4 dan pro? My understanding is something like this: kyu player are casual players (or weak tournament players) low dan players are something like advanced amateurs or experts and weak masters in chess. Pro's are like super high dan players and there is not very much difference between ranks compared to regular dan players. I have heard that a 1d professional will beat a 9d professional with 3 or 4 stones. So a 1d pro is something like a 7 or 8d+ amateur? Is this all roughly correct? I guess _yes_ but all the numbers are of Japanese rating, which is something different than KGS. Following is a (not authorized but many people agreed) mapping: KGS Japan (more exactly, East Japan) 1d 3d~4d 1k 2d~3d 2k 1d~2d I'm KGS 3k now and, perhaps, 1d at Tokyo. I won a game against a Japanese 9p once with 8 stones handicap at a teaching game last Nov but I won't be able to win against Kaori Inaba 4p at an open game with 8 stones. I'm pretty sure that Crazy Stone is stronger than I and is 1k or stronger because, as you wrote, it won the game. Hideki So I assume that Aoba Kaori is a 4d professional? That would relate to something in the ballpark of 9 or 10d amateur if there were such a thing. And with 8 stones handicap, this implies that CrazyStone did what a 2d+ would have done, or it is weaker than 2d but got lucky. So it's performance rating for that one game is lower bounded at around 1 or 2 dan. Since it won the game we could pick 2 dan as a better lower bound guess although since it won we do not have a reasonable upper bound guess on it's performance except our own credulity. Does what I said make any sense? I am not a go player and I'm not very comfortable with this guesswork. In chess, if you beat a player I am used to thinking in terms of setting a performance rating of around 400 ELO higher for that one game. I know this is not precise, but I also think of 400 ELO subtracted from the player you beat as a kind of estimated lower bound on your strength. If you beat a 2500 ELO chess player, it's a relatively safe bet that you are at least 2100 ELO in strength although technically there is a chance you could lose to anybody, even a random move generator. I know this isn't precise language, but how many ranks would give us around 90 - 95% confidence of superiority?If I beat a 5 dan player, could you say that it's very likely I am at least 3 dan in strength? I'm thinking that if we estimate Aoba at 10d amateur and CrazyStone wins with 8 stone handicap, it is roughly equivalent to beating a 2d player without handicap and that we can subtract 2 stones to say that with pretty high confidence CrazyStone is playing at least 1 kyu (but that's it's much more likely Crazy Stone is stronger than this - after all it performed in this one game at least as well as 2d player.) - Don On Thu, 2008-09-04 at 16:28 +0200, Rémi Coulom wrote: terry mcintyre wrote: Congratulations! Thanks. I'm dying for details! What was the time limit? The organizers asked that the program should play at a constant time (30 second) per move. The sgf file contains time stamps (you can see the time with gogui, for instance). I don't know what was her time control, but she apparently played at the same pace as the program. Did the game end on time or by resignation at move 179? She resigned. The pro was Aoba Kaori, yes? Yes. The only other information I have about the match are these pages in Japanese: https://secure1.gakkai-web.net/gakkai/fit/program/html/event/event.html#6 http://www.ipsj.or.jp/10jigyo/fit/fit2008/events.html#1-4-1 I hope the organizers can send me some photos tomorrow. Then I will set up a web page and tell the list. Rémi ___ 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/ -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kato) ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Kaori-Crazystone
http://senseis.xmp.net/?KGSRatingMath -- this table does include handicap stones in the calculations. Terry McIntyre [EMAIL PROTECTED] Go is very hard. The more I learn about it, the less I know. -Jie Li, 9 dan - Original Message From: terry mcintyre [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: computer go computer-go@computer-go.org Sent: Thursday, September 4, 2008 11:02:51 AM Subject: Re: [computer-go] Kaori-Crazystone This page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Go_ranks_and_ratings gives a table of win probabilities versus rank differences. I haven't yet found such a table for handicap games. Terry McIntyre Go is very hard. The more I learn about it, the less I know. -Jie Li, 9 dan ___ 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] Kaori-Crazystone
Here is something interesting from this page: Note how different the expectations of each system are regarding even games between players of unequal strength. If you can win 90% of even games against a 2 kyu player, the AGA believes you are 1.33 ranks higher, the EGF believes you are 2.42 ranks higher, and the IGS believes you are 2.80 ranks higher. The lack of agreement stems from a tradition of playing handicap games between players of different ranks, so there is a lack of data regarding non-handicap games between mismatched opponents. - Don On Thu, 2008-09-04 at 11:02 -0700, terry mcintyre wrote: This page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Go_ranks_and_ratings gives a table of win probabilities versus rank differences. I haven't yet found such a table for handicap games. Terry McIntyre [EMAIL PROTECTED] Go is very hard. The more I learn about it, the less I know. -Jie Li, 9 dan ___ 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] Kaori-Crazystone
I'm not surprised that the data for games with 90% winning chances is lacking. The McMahon pairing system is widely used in western go tournaments to prevent mismatched games, because most players don't like mismatched games (either as the stronger or the weaker player). Rating systems are relatively new in the go world and they don't seem very popular (or even known) in the far east where 99% of the go population lives. So I guess go rating systems are still quite immature: AGA, KGS and EGF all have different conversion functions to map winning probability to dan and kyu ranks. These conversions are probably based on different statistical data sources and probably also on other considerations like calculation convenience and different theoretical considerations of their inventors. Dave Van: [EMAIL PROTECTED] namens Don Dailey Verzonden: do 4-9-2008 20:55 Aan: computer-go Onderwerp: Re: [computer-go] Kaori-Crazystone Here is something interesting from this page: Note how different the expectations of each system are regarding even games between players of unequal strength. If you can win 90% of even games against a 2 kyu player, the AGA believes you are 1.33 ranks higher, the EGF believes you are 2.42 ranks higher, and the IGS believes you are 2.80 ranks higher. The lack of agreement stems from a tradition of playing handicap games between players of different ranks, so there is a lack of data regarding non-handicap games between mismatched opponents. - Don On Thu, 2008-09-04 at 11:02 -0700, terry mcintyre wrote: This page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Go_ranks_and_ratings gives a table of win probabilities versus rank differences. I haven't yet found such a table for handicap games. Terry McIntyre [EMAIL PROTECTED] Go is very hard. The more I learn about it, the less I know. -Jie Li, 9 dan ___ 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] Kaori-Crazystone
2008/9/4 Rémi Coulom [EMAIL PROTECTED]: only 5k, so I cannot really tell. But when I see the horrors it plays in some games, I suppose it must play much stronger than 1k in some other games in order to get a rating of 1k. Look for instance at these two games: a win: http://files.gokgs.com/games/2008/8/23/CrazyStone-mandelbrot.sgf a loss: http://files.gokgs.com/games/2008/8/23/CrazyStone-beoren.sgf (with comments of the opponents at the end) It also shows that some people lose just because they assume that they can outsmart the bot in any fight regardless how unfavourable is the start of the fight. Looking these games where humans pull surprise wins you can often see that they just don't fight for the joy of it but only when they have some backing. Leela especially has aggressive style for which opponent getting carried away by it is pretty easy. And losing those fights is easy as well. But as for Semeai problem I think one would need pre-analysis of situation, in classical program fashion and recognising important semeias and the directing the search with specialized move generators for semeai. I guess the term would be importance sampling. -- Petri Pitkänen e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
