On anti-MCTS bot strategy:
I don’t know of a strategy, but there sure are principles.
I can state one as a proverb:
We you clarify, you are helping the bot.
E.g., If a connection works but is not obvious, if a semeai
can be won but is not obvious, etc. the bot has to discover
it for each
Oops. Should be:
When you clarify, ..
Jacques.
___
Computer-go mailing list
Computer-go@dvandva.org
http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
Actually, trying to beat a bot with any special strategy doesn't make
a lot of sense.
Just play your best go and be happy that you have an interesting opponent.
I know that there is a track record of people initially losing against a
bot, and beating it afterwards.
But that is mainly due to
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 3:38 AM, Stefan Kaitschick
stefan.kaitsch...@hamburg.de wrote:
Actually, trying to beat a bot with any special strategy doesn't make a lot
of sense.
Just play your best go and be happy that you have an interesting opponent.
I'm not much of a Go player. But as a human,
, but it might be 80% if you include ko
fights.
David
-Original Message-
From: computer-go-boun...@dvandva.org [mailto:computer-go-
boun...@dvandva.org] On Behalf Of Jeff Nowakowski
Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 2010 8:34 AM
To: computer...@computer-go.org
Subject: Re: [Computer-go
Am 15.09.2010 17:34, schrieb Jeff Nowakowski:
On 09/15/2010 07:09 AM, terry mcintyre wrote:
There are a fair number of joseki variations which have branches
where you are
not supposed to play X because you lose a capturing race. Initiate
such a
variation, leave it unfinished, move on to the
...@dvandva.org [mailto:computer-go-
boun...@dvandva.org] On Behalf Of Jeff Nowakowski
Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 2010 8:34 AM
To: computer...@computer-go.org
Subject: Re: [Computer-go] anti-pondering
On 09/15/2010 07:09 AM, terry mcintyre wrote:
There are a fair number
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 11:34 AM, Jeff Nowakowski j...@dilacero.org wrote:
On 09/15/2010 07:09 AM, terry mcintyre wrote:
There are a fair number of joseki variations which have branches where you
are
not supposed to play X because you lose a capturing race. Initiate such a
variation, leave
Fixing the problem with MC-like programs with respect to large semeai will
probably not be merely a different style of play but a genuine improvement in
playing skill. That's why authors like David Fotland ask how do strong humans
learn to consistently beat programs? -- it's a way to find and
Congratulations, Matthew!
An idle thought, for humans trying to beat computers: after choosing
your move in a difficult part of the game, you could play (waste) a ko
threat and then quickly play the real move, to deprive the computer of
pondering time.
This might become post of the month!
this made me smile.
i think, though, that wasting a ko threat is wasting a ko threat and that
trying to force a computer into a bad time or memory management situation
seems like a fairly unsound strategy -- you can only really guarantee that
you've done two things (without exact knowledge of the
In message
aanlktinktots0=y8h5k_1jpplvxekffh0tar0yto2...@mail.gmail.com, steve
uurtamo uurt...@gmail.com writes
this made me smile.
i think, though, that wasting a ko threat is wasting a ko threat and
that trying to force a computer into a bad time or memory management
situation seems like a
On 09/14/2010 04:36 PM, terry mcintyre wrote:
From my observations of human-versus-bot games, a winning strategy against bots
seems to be:
Create several capturing races, even if you lose all of them.
Is there an established, reliable way to create capturing races against
bots?
Cut whenever you can. Leave cutting points behind. They will cut.
All my won games against ManyFaces of Go are going about like this. In early
game same unreasonable groupf MFOG dies. But inprocess I need leave cutting
point behing or my groups are split in two. Then in Late middle game/eraly
end
14 matches
Mail list logo
