Am 15.07.2011 14:03, schrieb Petr Baudis:
> For black I would wave my hands differently:
> Since the opponent must be stronger, it's a good heuristic to assume
> a problem with your own analysis if you think your improving.
I'm not sure that is satisfactory explanation. Even after 10s of
On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 10:50:05PM +0200, Stefan Kaitschick wrote:
> Ah ok. You don't use it for white in a handicap game?
Handicap games are just special cases, what I detect are good-for-white
and good-for-black positions. White in a handicap game is a
good-for-black position. See
http:
Am 14.07.2011 17:52, schrieb Don Dailey:
In theory you HAVE to cede ground as you have a lost game.Even
though I do not play much go and I'm not strong, I know that you have
to give up ground in some places to gain ground in others and that is
what separates the men from the boys.
So I ca
Am 14.07.2011 17:39, schrieb Petr Baudis:
On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 02:07:50PM +0200, Stefan Kaitschick wrote:
Just a hand waving explanation for the ratchet: you simply cannot
afford to cede ground to black when giving a handicap.
Even though the playouts do not model a weak response by black, a
pretty interesting, don.
the generally accepted strategy among humans in high handicap games is
either to wait for errors and then punish them mercilessly, or to pick
fights, since the stronger player is generally a much better fighter.
the idea is generally to take advantage of these differences
On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 8:07 AM, Stefan Kaitschick <
stefan.kaitsch...@hamburg.de> wrote:
> Am 12.07.2011 11:54, schrieb Petr Baudis:
>
>Hi!
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 02:13:50PM +0200, Olivier Teytaud wrote:
>>
>>> I have posted too quickly - after all I have something which works both
>>>
On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 02:07:50PM +0200, Stefan Kaitschick wrote:
> Just a hand waving explanation for the ratchet: you simply cannot
> afford to cede ground to black when giving a handicap.
> Even though the playouts do not model a weak response by black, a
> winrate of 42% implicitly does assume
Am 12.07.2011 11:54, schrieb Petr Baudis:
Hi!
On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 02:13:50PM +0200, Olivier Teytaud wrote:
I have posted too quickly - after all I have something which works both for
black and white and for various board sizes, using
the "rule 42" spirit. Good news :-)
Glad you got i
Hi!
On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 02:13:50PM +0200, Olivier Teytaud wrote:
> I have posted too quickly - after all I have something which works both for
> black and white and for various board sizes, using
> the "rule 42" spirit. Good news :-)
Glad you got it to work! I updated the preprint on my h
I don't think that adjusting to a certain winrate at a certain point in
the game is really good.
What I would like to see, is an independend winrate vs. dyn. komi
profiling for the current position.
Only then can you really decide, which komi level currently delivers the
best bang for the buck.
I have posted too quickly - after all I have something which works both for
black and white and for various board sizes, using
the "rule 42" spirit. Good news :-)
Best regards,
Olivier
2011/6/21 Olivier Teytaud
>
> Hideki: « # Using some feedback mechanism to keep WR around 50% (used in
>> FudoG
> Hideki: « # Using some feedback mechanism to keep WR around 50% (used in
> FudoGo and pachi?) is an another issue. »
>
>
Hi all;
I can have positive results with rules as in Pachi and MFOG (linearly
decreasing dynamic komi), but not yet with rules aimed at preserving a WR
around 50% (e.g. the 42%
Jouni Valkonen: :
>Hideki: « # Using some feedback mechanism to keep WR around 50% (used in
>FudoGo and pachi?) is an another issue. »
>
>This might be interesting if it can be applied to even games. So that
>dynamic komi is adjusted, that the winratio is always slightly positive.
Usually dynamic
Hideki: « # Using some feedback mechanism to keep WR around 50% (used in
FudoGo and pachi?) is an another issue. »
This might be interesting if it can be applied to even games. So that
dynamic komi is adjusted, that the winratio is always slightly positive.
This way gobot would think that it is le
Álvaro Begué: :
>Don, I assume you mean "with high handicap games...". The problem is
>that dynamic komi assumes there will be points to be gained later in
>the game, and the program might be happy to get into a situation where
>the opponent has a lot of safe territory, and then there are no
>oppor
I dont agree. Playing an idiots move with probability p just messes up
semeais.
Better to take away some of the more computationally expensive policies
for the weaker player.
This is more realistic, and also saves some time in the playouts as a
side benefit.
Stefan
Don, I assume you mean "wit
Woops, yes, I meant high handicap games.
Your scheme definitely sounds plausible to me.
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 5:22 PM, Álvaro Begué wrote:
> Don, I assume you mean "with high handicap games...". The problem is
> that dynamic komi assumes there will be points to be gained later in
> the gam
Don, I assume you mean "with high handicap games...". The problem is
that dynamic komi assumes there will be points to be gained later in
the game, and the program might be happy to get into a situation where
the opponent has a lot of safe territory, and then there are no
opportunities to recover f
With high komi games you are starting the game from a dead lost position so
you almost HAVE to assume your opponent is stupid and take some "unsound"
risk.Of course risk is not "unsound" if you are losing anyway. I see
no problem with your idea but the devil is in the details.
On Fri, Jun
Zen19S is an account on KGS with long time controls(20 + 30/5)*, running
on acluster of 6 pcs. It holds a solid 4dan rating.
I think it's handicap openings have really improved with both black and
white, and I think dyn. komi is a big part of this.
But I have seen some 6 stone games as white(the
20 matches
Mail list logo
