Hello Hendrik,
are you still active in computer-go?
Are there other computer-go guys in Osnabrueck?
(Jan Takeshi Saito was there many years ago.)
Cheers, Ingo
Original-Nachricht
Datum: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 23:18:58 +0100
Von: Hendrik Baier hendrik.ba...@googlemail.com
An:
The February 2011 KGS computer Go tournament will be on Sunday February
6th, starting at 08:00 UTC and ending at 16:00 UTC.
I have tried to post more details, but my postings aren't appearing.
Nick
--
Nick Weddn...@maproom.co.uk
___
Computer-go
The February 2011 KGS computer Go tournament will be on Sunday February
6th, starting at 08:00 UTC and ending at 16:00 UTC.
It will be a 16-round Swiss with 19x19 boards, 14 minutes each of main
time, and Canadian Overtime of 25 moves in 60 seconds. It will use
Chinese rules with 7.5 points
(repeat posting, the previous copy has not appeared yet)
The February 2011 KGS computer Go tournament will be on Sunday February
6th, starting at 08:00 UTC and ending at 16:00 UTC.
It will be a 16-round Swiss with 19x19 boards, 14 minutes each of main
time, and Canadian
I have become unable to start a new thread in this mailing list. I
wonder whether I can reply in an existing one?
Nick
--
Nick Weddn...@maproom.co.uk
___
Computer-go mailing list
Computer-go@dvandva.org
This showed up ok for me. Will try and watch it.
-Josh
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 1:38 PM, Nick Wedd n...@maproom.co.uk wrote:
The February 2011 KGS computer Go tournament will be on Sunday February 6th,
starting at 08:00 UTC and ending at 16:00 UTC.
I have tried to post more details, but my
Hi!
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 02:50:59PM +, Jonathan Chetwynd wrote:
Terry,
I can only provide what the Go engine exposes, so please encourage
the developers,
in this case Fuego may not provide a kill alert, but certainly it is
in codebase, Fuego has strong kill facility.
I will also
super bowl bot tournament. :)
s.
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 1:38 PM, Nick Wedd n...@maproom.co.uk wrote:
The February 2011 KGS computer Go tournament will be on Sunday February 6th,
starting at 08:00 UTC and ending at 16:00 UTC.
I have tried to post more details, but my postings aren't
indeed weak and new bots are particularly welcome.
I fully agree for new bots. But for the others I'm curious: how many think
it's a good idea to
encourage several very weak bots, except one for parity? They are indeed
very useful
for debugging but this should be done on cgos not in a
Yes, we could take on the rules from any one of a number of other games.
Each would have some advantage, perhaps some disadvantage.
But why?
Rather than complicate the rule set to nudge our programs in one direction
or another via a new reward function, why don't we just concentrate on trying
I agree, it's no longer go if you add this kind of extra gamesmanship on
top.
Of course it's sometime fun to talk about it as a kind of speculation.
Don
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 7:38 PM, David Doshay ddos...@mac.com wrote:
Yes, we could take on the rules from any one of a number of other
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 11:12 AM, Don Dailey dailey@gmail.com wrote:
The problem is that you can still play the game out until there is just one
or two moves left and then resign. So for this work it has to be done at
some reasonable point in the game and who is to decide when that
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 4:12 PM, Don Dailey dailey@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 9:31 AM, Jonathan Chetwynd
j.chetw...@btinternet.com wrote:
Could a 'doubling dice'** encourage early resignation by programs?
each program would have to forfeit a double game, if it played on
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 8:31 PM, Álvaro Begué alvaro.be...@gmail.comwrote:
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 4:12 PM, Don Dailey dailey@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 9:31 AM, Jonathan Chetwynd
j.chetw...@btinternet.com wrote:
Could a 'doubling dice'** encourage early resignation
I like the idea, though for sure it would take extra work. I like the
idea of some kind of Bang Neki tournament even more. It was discussed
previously on the list:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.games.devel.go/20580
The best bots are already playing well. Who would have imagined a 1d bot
5
2011/1/28 Álvaro Begué alvaro.be...@gmail.com
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 4:12 PM, Don Dailey dailey@gmail.com wrote:
I don't understand your objection, Don. The side that is winning will
at some point determine that the probability of winning the game is
large enough (say, more than 80%)
16 matches
Mail list logo
