Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

On Fri, 2008-01-04 at 16:50 -0800, steve uurtamo wrote: > TCP/IP communication can be viewed as round-trip. > > UCP is one-way, TCP requires a response for each > packet. > For a high-level protocol, it's all the same. The fact that a TCP/IP packet is acknowledged matters not at all because the

Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

s/UCP/UDP/g; - Original Message From: steve uurtamo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: computer-go Sent: Friday, January 4, 2008 7:50:34 PM Subject: Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good TCP/IP communication can be viewed as round-trip. UCP is one-way, TCP requ

Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

TCP/IP communication can be viewed as round-trip. UCP is one-way, TCP requires a response for each packet. s. - Original Message From: Jason House <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: computer-go Sent: Friday, January 4, 2008 4:50:31 PM Subject: Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resig

Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

On Jan 4, 2008 4:44 PM, Gian-Carlo Pascutto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > steve uurtamo wrote: > >> It was my understanding that the netlag to the Philippines was about > >> 380 ms; accounting for an additiaonal 15% packet loss and we end up > >> at about 440 ms. > > > > i think that it works out t

Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

steve uurtamo wrote: It was my understanding that the netlag to the Philippines was about 380 ms; accounting for an additiaonal 15% packet loss and we end up at about 440 ms. i think that it works out to roughly double that because of the protocol, right? Yes, the server sends out the move an

Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

> It was my understanding that the netlag to the Philippines was about > 380 ms; accounting for an additiaonal 15% packet loss and we end up > at about 440 ms. i think that it works out to roughly double that because of the protocol, right? s. ___

Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

On Fri, 4 Jan 2008, Don Dailey wrote: It was my understanding the bot was losing 2 seconds per move. 1/2 second would probably not fix this. It was my understanding that the netlag to the Philippines was about 380 ms; accounting for an additiaonal 15% packet loss and we end up at about 440 ms

Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

It was my understanding the bot was losing 2 seconds per move. 1/2 second would probably not fix this. - Don Christoph Birk wrote: > On Fri, 4 Jan 2008, Don Dailey wrote: >> I think Fischer time is the solution to network lag. I can't give back >> the lag time, but I can make it so that you

Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > After 2000 playouts, AntIgo checks the estimated score. If it's way > ahead, it stops thinking and just plays the best move it has so far. > This way it plays very quickly when the game is won and the opponent > does not resign. (I don't apply this rule in the beginning

Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

On Fri, 4 Jan 2008, Don Dailey wrote: I think Fischer time is the solution to network lag. I can't give back the lag time, but I can make it so that you should not lose games as a result of it (unless it gets ridiculous.) I don't object to Fisher Time but just increasing the move-credit to 0.

Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

After 2000 playouts, AntIgo checks the estimated score. If it's way ahead, it stops thinking and just plays the best move it has so far. This way it plays very quickly when the game is won and the opponent does not resign. (I don't apply this rule in the beginning to avoid confusion in handicap

Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

I think Fischer time is the solution to network lag. I can't give back the lag time, but I can make it so that you should not lose games as a result of it (unless it gets ridiculous.) - Don Jacques Basaldúa wrote: > The problem is avoiding that an inferior program wins a lost position > on tim

Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

The problem is avoiding that an inferior program wins a lost position on time extending the number of moves. If you could choose, what side would you prefer to be? As a human, there is no doubt. But as a program it is even better: the strongest program. Because computers can play faster than human

Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

Robert Jasiek wrote: > Jason House wrote: > > I missed [...] the part about >> solving how to end the game in an elegant way. > > "elegant" is an aspect of art, and I have not studied it profoundly in > relation to rules yet because I concentrate on things that can be > derived from definitions a

Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

Jason House wrote: > I missed [...] the part about solving how to end the game in an elegant way. "elegant" is an aspect of art, and I have not studied it profoundly in relation to rules yet because I concentrate on things that can be derived from definitions and evaluated by objective deriva

Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

On Wed, Jan 02, 2008 at 07:25:00PM -0800, David Fotland wrote: > Japanese rules. I know people on this list don't like them, but the game > plays out almost the same as with Chinese rules, but since there is a one > point penalty for playing inside your own territory, the game ends much > earlier.

Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

John Tromp wrote: > On Jan 3, 2008 10:46 AM, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Yes, the KGS rules gives only 1 chance to agree. At one point KGS >> allowed this to happen repeatedly, but it cause some bots to infinite >> loop on the server when they disagreed. So I think it's be

Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

I have to correct this slightly. Don Dailey wrote: > Just for fun I thought of a simple protocol for ending the game earlier > that I think would work: > > Each program, when it sends it's move to the server can optionally send > 2 lists of dead stones to the server. The first list represents

Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

On Jan 3, 2008 10:46 AM, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Yes, the KGS rules gives only 1 chance to agree. At one point KGS > allowed this to happen repeatedly, but it cause some bots to infinite > loop on the server when they disagreed. So I think it's better than > nothing, but imper

Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

Jason House wrote: > > > On Jan 3, 2008 10:21 AM, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > wrote: > > > > Robert Jasiek wrote: > > Don Dailey wrote: > > > you can never solve the problem of a > >> malicious opponent who wants to prolong the game needlessly. >

Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

On Jan 3, 2008 10:21 AM, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Robert Jasiek wrote: > > Don Dailey wrote: > > > you can never solve the problem of a > >> malicious opponent who wants to prolong the game needlessly. > > > > I solved that many years ago: Constant game end rule. > > http://home

Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

Robert Jasiek wrote: > Don Dailey wrote: > > you can never solve the problem of a >> malicious opponent who wants to prolong the game needlessly. > > I solved that many years ago: Constant game end rule. > http://home.snafu.de/jasiek/endrules.html > > The question is rather whether one wants such

Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

Don Dailey wrote: > you can never solve the problem of a malicious opponent who wants to prolong the game needlessly. I solved that many years ago: Constant game end rule. http://home.snafu.de/jasiek/endrules.html The question is rather whether one wants such a rule. (I do not like it because

Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

Robert Jasiek wrote: > Don Dailey wrote: >>> This raises an interesting (to me) theoretical question: is there a >>> ruleset that allows games to end in a more reasonable time without >>> changing general play? >> There is no such rule-set that I know of. > > If it is specified more clearly wha

Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

Just for fun I thought of a simple protocol for ending the game earlier that I think would work: Each program, when it sends it's move to the server can optionally send 2 lists of dead stones to the server. The first list represents the status of the board BEFORE the move is played and the secon

Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

David Fotland wrote: > Japanese rules. I know people on this list don't like them, but the game > plays out almost the same as with Chinese rules, but since there is a one > point penalty for playing inside your own territory, the game ends much > earlier. > The real issue on a server that in

Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

Don Dailey wrote: This raises an interesting (to me) theoretical question: is there a ruleset that allows games to end in a more reasonable time without changing general play? There is no such rule-set that I know of. If it is specified more clearly what "end in a more reasonable time witho

Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

Thomas Nelson wrote: > > > On Wed, 2 Jan 2008, Don Dailey wrote: > >> If we don't like the rules, we can talk about changing them in order to >> get behavior that fits our sensibilities better.But we have been >> over this ground many times before. It seems like the only reasonable >> way t

Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

True, there is no other game quite like Go in the western world, so it takes a few games to figure these things out. I help this "problem" in the learning curve along by starting on 5x5 boards and then moving up to 7x7 boards. It lets beginners see the end quickly and lessens the time betwe

RE: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

Japanese rules. I know people on this list don't like them, but the game plays out almost the same as with Chinese rules, but since there is a one point penalty for playing inside your own territory, the game ends much earlier. David > > This raises an interesting (to me) theoretical question:

Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

On Wed, 2 Jan 2008, Don Dailey wrote: If we don't like the rules, we can talk about changing them in order to get behavior that fits our sensibilities better.But we have been over this ground many times before. It seems like the only reasonable way to properly score games is to play them

Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

They are not on a fixed schedule. I currently just start a round whenever the previous round is finished. I will probably add another time-control too. There will one long time control, and short time controls games in between. When a long game is complete, you will start a short time contro

Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

Maybe some day computer go will reach the same level of "maturity" as computer chess and we will need safeguards against all sorts of churlishness. But so far, CGOS is very civilized. I favor encouraging people to make their bots resign, but not penalizing those who don't. The MC programs are

Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

On Jan 2, 2008 3:29 PM, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I am considering to implement Fischer time on CGOS, but I would like it > to be painless. I don't believe GTP has a provision to handle it - > but I will check to see what it does have. (I have no intentions of > doing the byo-

Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

On Wed, 2008-01-02 at 15:29 -0500, Don Dailey wrote: > I am considering to implement Fischer time on CGOS How are you going to deal with keeping the games on a fixed schedule? -Jeff ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.co

Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

I am considering to implement Fischer time on CGOS, but I would like it to be painless. I don't believe GTP has a provision to handle it - but I will check to see what it does have. (I have no intentions of doing the byo-yomi stuff.) However, even without a change to your program Fischer ti

Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

Hi Eric, I think there are rules and there is etiquette. Rules you can control, but etiquette you cannot. You can never stop bad behavior and have the additional problem that you must "judge" it. You have to decide in which case a player exercised bad manners and so on. It's a tough th

Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

On Wed, 2 Jan 2008, Don Dailey wrote: Better would be some kind of victory declaration.The program claims victory - which means that it agrees that every move from now on (for itself) is a pass move. I disagree. Increasing the time-allowance for a PASS move is simpler and more elegant IMHO.

Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

On Wed, 2 Jan 2008, Eric Boesch wrote: I was going to suggest copying KGS's "no time cost for a pass within a reasonable number of seconds" rule, but I see Erik just did that. Well, I'll just second the suggestion. Unfortunately, the "reasonable number of seconds" would probably have to be low, j

Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

>> Better would be some kind of victory declaration.The program claims >> victory - which means that it agrees that every move from now on (for >> itself) is a pass move. It would be the counterpart to resignation - >> with the provision that you give up all rights to defend yourself if yo

Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

i like don's idea about using fischer time. byo-yomi seems to be the obvious solution to the problem (just make it a small byo-yomi time, something like 5 seconds), but fischer time has some pretty magical features that computers can easily take advantage of. time management should be quite a bit

Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

On Jan 2, 2008 5:54 PM, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Erik van der Werf wrote: > > I'd propose something simpler: > > > > No time is deducted for pass. > > > > With this rule your program will only loose time when it absolutely > > has to respond to the opponents move. In most games the w

Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

On Jan 2, 2008 5:46 PM, Eric Boesch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >... > Finally, I'm still not aware of any go programs that keep playing > after they have obtained a dead lost position because the programmer > wants them to do it. It's just easier to write a program that doesn't > know when to resig

Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

Erik van der Werf wrote: > I'd propose something simpler: > > No time is deducted for pass. > > With this rule your program will only loose time when it absolutely > has to respond to the opponents move. In most games the winning > program can simply play until it has a sufficient number of > unc

Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

In chess, playing the game out to the bitter end can be defensible, but in go, it isn't. The meaning of the "end of the game" in go is fluid, but it's not "when it's no longer possible to play a move". In absolute time limit games, when significant per-move lag exists (which is true in all human ma

Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

On Jan 2, 2008 10:27 AM, Erik van der Werf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'd propose something simpler: > > No time is deducted for pass. That may be a bit too lax. A bot that thinks for 5 seconds before passing could delay all bots on the server. I'd favor something in the same spirit that lim

Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

One of my bots will pass if the opponent passes first - if it's a win. Even if the opponent has dead stones still on the board.But of course it won't pass if the Tromp Taylor score is not enough for the win. - Don Jason House wrote: > If your bot has enough points to win under Tromp Taylo

Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

On Jan 2, 2008 4:18 PM, Jason House <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I've also considered the exact opposite strategy... When losing a game, aim > to stress the opponent's time management (since it's the highest probability > of victory). That would include underhanded tricks like filling my own > ey

Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

I'd propose something simpler: No time is deducted for pass. With this rule your program will only loose time when it absolutely has to respond to the opponents move. In most games the winning program can simply play until it has a sufficient number of unconditionally alive stones on the board an

Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

If your bot has enough points to win under Tromp Taylor scoring, why capture dead stones? Passing is the fastest way to end the game in your favor. That trick should limit your game length to something manageable. I've been thinking that I should add that feature to my bot. I've also considered

Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

Of course it's also possible to implement the Fischer clock on CGOS. Fischer clock is where you have a fixed time component (such as 5 minutes) but you also are given an increment - another fixed time component that is added to your clock EACH MOVE. So it might be expressed as "2 minutes +

Re: [computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

Hi Peter, CGOS doesn't count the first 1/4 second of thinking time and this could help a little. This isn't the same as Fischer time however because you are not given the time if it adds to your surplus. It is designed so that if you play fast enough (less than 1/4 second per move) you will n

[computer-go] Please have your bot resign, for your own good

I realize there are some legitimate reasons to have your bot play out the games on cgos until the bitter end. Here I would like to present one reason why you may want to have your bot resign instead. I live in the Philippines. My ping from my computers here is usualy about .3-.4 seconds. I do o