It is currently Sat Aug 17, 2019 5:25 am

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 720 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 ... 36  Next
Author Message
Offline
 Post subject: Re: “Decision: case of using computer assistance in League A
Post #281 Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2018 3:05 pm 
Dies in gote

Posts: 31
Liked others: 3
Was liked: 7
Rank: 5 kyu
AlesCieply wrote:

May you provide a reference? I do not recall any 4d (and not fast improving!) player performace like that. Of course, there are fast improving 1d players who perform as 3d at tournaments regularly. I agree, the figure 3000 tournaments is approximate, thought even if it was 1000 ...



Even if it was one over 1000, this means that it is not a rare event. 1 over 1000 for every single players and for every series of 4 games means that a such event will happen 1 time in 2 o 3 tournaments, way more often of what you think and what you wrote in your document.


Last edited by bugsti on Tue Jun 05, 2018 3:56 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: “Decision: case of using computer assistance in League A
Post #282 Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2018 3:16 pm 
Dies in gote

Posts: 31
Liked others: 3
Was liked: 7
Rank: 5 kyu
AlesCieply wrote:

May you provide a reference? I do not recall any 4d (and not fast improving!) player performace like that. Of course, there are fast improving 1d players who perform as 3d at tournaments regularly. I agree, the figure 3000 tournaments is approximate, thought even if it was 1000 ...



Even if it was one over 1000, this means that it is not a rare event. 1 over 1000 for every single players and for every series of 4 games means that a such event will happen 1 time in 2 o 3 tournaments, way more often of what you think and what you wrote in your document.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: “Decision: case of using computer assistance in League A
Post #283 Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2018 3:22 pm 
Dies in gote

Posts: 31
Liked others: 3
Was liked: 7
Rank: 5 kyu
This story seems illuminating :clap: :clap: :clap:

"His [KEN REGAN] work began on September 29, 2006, during the Topalov-Kramnik World Championship match. Vladimir Kramnik had just forfeited game five in protest to the Topalov team's accusation that Kramnik was consulting a chess engine during trips to his private bathroom. (...) Topalov's team published a controversial press release trying to prove their previous allegations. Topalov's manager, Silvio Danailov, wrote in the release, '... we would like to present to your attention coincidence statistics of the moves of GM Kramnik with recommendations of chess program Fritz 9.' (...) An online battle commenced between pundits who took Danailov's 'proof' seriously versus others, like Regan, who insisted that valid statistical methods to detect computer assistance did not yet exist. (...) In just a few weeks, the greatest existential threat to chess had gone from a combination of bad politics and a lack of financial support to something potentially more sinister: scientific ignorance. In Regan's mind, this threat seemed too imminent to ignore. 'I care about chess,' he says. 'I felt called to do the work at a time when it really did seem like the chess world was going to break apart.'"


This post by bugsti was liked by: Bill Spight
Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: “Decision: case of using computer assistance in League A
Post #284 Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2018 4:20 pm 
Dies in gote

Posts: 31
Liked others: 3
Was liked: 7
Rank: 5 kyu
Bill Spight wrote:
I found the following paragraph to be of interest:

In my earlier criticism I pointed out that similarity (confirmatory evidence) is very weak evidence, and that contrast (disconfirmatory evidence) was necessary. I was unaware that Leela herself provided contrasting evidence, the contrast being between Leela's choices and the choices of strong amateurs. Picking one of Leela's choices which is not one of the human choices would be evidence of cheating. (Such evidence seems to be more available in chess, where top engines often play non-human moves.) There are other ways of finding disconfirmatory evidence, but they involve analyzing a large number of games. Here was disconfirmatory evidence that Leela put on the plate. However, that evidence was nil. There was no case where Metta picked a choice of Leela's that was not also a human choice.

To be sure, other evidence of cheating might have been developed, but was not.


I agree that this disconfirmatory evidence tells more than hundreds of messagges of amateurish statistics and accusations.

I wonder why nobody saw this in time. We may have spared weeks of debates and avoid ruining a player reputation and turning all go community in paranoia. This situation has dug wounds that are difficult to recover.


This post by bugsti was liked by: Charlie
Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: “Decision: case of using computer assistance in League A
Post #285 Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2018 4:57 pm 
Beginner

Posts: 1
Liked others: 0
Was liked: 0
Lukan wrote:
[Charlie wrote]Do not be arrogant. Many people who read this thread will not go and download your PDF and read it in great detail.
You are not only accusing someone of cheating but also accusing them of fraudulently fabricating evidence! The very least you could do is exercise some care and diligence in doing so![/Charlie wrote]

I'm sorry? I feel like the only one here behaving arrogant is you, after what I have just read.
And besides this discussion it's definitely the Italian captain ("MircoF"), who writes one vulgar e-mail after another to Ales Cieply... Therefore, don't start a war from this, please and try to respect the opposition.



Lukan, your rage and childish behaviour is poisoning the go community. Please accept an advice from someone older than you and stop this witch hunt.
You are an high dan player and you are supposed to help the development of Go in europe and not to sabotage it.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: “Decision: case of using computer assistance in League A
Post #286 Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2018 5:37 pm 
Beginner

Posts: 14
Liked others: 4
Was liked: 8
Rank: 1 dan
Uberdude wrote:

Now that I have a PC with gpu I let Leela analyse for 2.5m sims and q15 did rise from choice #18 to #5. So Leela did start to think about it more but was still far off local moves around the cutting stone (net and p7 peep top iirc).



2.5 m sims seems a huge amount of time to me. How many minutes it will take to calculate 2.5 m playouts? I guess that the player took much less time to play that move. didn't he?

It seems to me that q15 sequence worked only because of his opponent cooperation. Black should extend on M10 at some point in the process as suggested by Leela. The game would have been close this way.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: “Decision: case of using computer assistance in League A
Post #287 Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2018 5:41 pm 
Dies in gote

Posts: 45
Liked others: 31
Was liked: 18
Rank: 2kyu
I have not read this entire thread, so forgive me if my words are a repeat.

Given what has clearly happened, a well founded suspicion of a player using computer aid in an online tournament, has a profound meaning for any future online tournament whether the suspicion is true or not. The implications are:

1. A player will not be able to earn a rank, money or prizes from playing in an online tournament, given that there is no sure way to determine if he is honest or not.

2. In the future any online tournament will be played for fun with a gentleman's agreement not to cheat.

3. Any results will be considered in a lighthearted way and they will not be assigned any deep meaning. As such they will be quickly forgotten.

4. Face to face tournaments will hold the status of being the only meaningful Go tournaments. (Cheating in such a tournament is still possible but it must be much harder and less likely)


Regarding players who are guilty of bad manners and poor sportsmanship:

metta [4k]: i'm sorry but i'm used to play go not this disgusting game, please when you'll learn to play this game inform me so i can take you off of my censor list

In my opinion such players should chose another game. They are not fit to play Go.


Last edited by Gobang on Wed Jun 06, 2018 12:20 am, edited 1 time in total.
Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: “Decision: case of using computer assistance in League A
Post #288 Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2018 10:09 pm 
Tengen

Posts: 4794
Liked others: 0
Was liked: 648
What is all this "the Go world is breaking apart" talk? That there are different opinions on one topic does not mean that the Go world would break apart.


This post by RobertJasiek was liked by: Bill Spight
Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: “Decision: case of using computer assistance in League A
Post #289 Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2018 10:23 pm 
Tengen

Posts: 4794
Liked others: 0
Was liked: 648
Shenoute wrote:
It is also the account of a very frequent escaper. Not that this says much about the cheating case but if this is/was indeed Carlo Metta's account, the idea that such a player can be a referee during the EGC is disturbing/laughable...


We do not need rumours and speculation. Was it or was it not? What is the evidence of very frequent escaper? And do not repeat the cited talks, which show nothing but different, slightly heated opinions on whether undo is good.


This post by RobertJasiek was liked by: Charlie
Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: “Decision: case of using computer assistance in League A
Post #290 Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2018 11:18 pm 
Lives in gote
User avatar

Posts: 499
Liked others: 45
Was liked: 173
RobertJasiek wrote:
What is the evidence of very frequent escaper? And do not repeat the cited talks, which show nothing but different, slightly heated opinions on whether undo is good.


See game archives here. There are many forfeited games (games are marked as forfeited when they are escaped by a frequent escaper).

Note however that

1. We are talking about old behaviors. People shouldn't be blamed for past behaviors if they have improved since then.

2. Being a sore loser (or having been one in the past) doesn't make you a cheater, whether in go or in other games. Arguments like that should not be taken into account when accusing someone of cheating.


This post by jlt was liked by 2 people: frmor, zermelo
Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: “Decision: case of using computer assistance in League A
Post #291 Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2018 12:11 am 
Lives in sente

Posts: 1235
Liked others: 99
Was liked: 262
So the new evidence needs new work before it can be treated seriously.
For point 1, I think it would be interested to plot rating performance per online event, and per offline event. Of course, you need several unbiased counter examples.
For point 2 lots more data needed to make a serious point. A huge work.
Point 3, I am satisfied with Carlo's explanation as to this point. In particular, I have to imagine that this game was already analyzed, so I don't see why it would be hidden.

Regarding #1 and #2, I suppose a lot of us have a morbid fascination with this case, but I think the effort is not worth it. Even if there was cheating here, I can't believe it was done in so stupid a way as to leave a clear trail behind. Each time new evidence is badly presented, it weakens the case.

_________________
North Lecale


This post by Javaness2 was liked by 2 people: bugsti, Charlie
Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: “Decision: case of using computer assistance in League A
Post #292 Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2018 12:37 am 
Dies in gote

Posts: 45
Liked others: 31
Was liked: 18
Rank: 2kyu
I believe the discussion of guilty or not guilty with respect to an individual player is not of much value. People can and will make up their own minds.

Computers have become much stronger than human beings. This is a fact. In my opinion online tournaments become casual affairs with no meaning beyond the pleasure of those who participate. I don't see any means to police the use of computer assistance in such tournaments.


This post by Gobang was liked by: zermelo
Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: “Decision: case of using computer assistance in League A
Post #293 Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2018 12:40 am 
Oza

Posts: 2338
Liked others: 15
Was liked: 3394
There has since been a new case of a very lowly ranked Italian, with a previous history of alleged match-fixing (according to the BBC), causing a major upset over one of the world's strongest players.

Marco Cecchinato, ranked 72nd in the world, has just (June 2018) defeated tennis superstar Novak Djokovic in the French Open quarter-finals.

Cecchinato had never before won a main-draw match in a Grand Slam before Roland Garros.

With other superstrong players crying their eyes out in the locker room and crying foul, umpires are urgently trying to discover where Cecchinato is hiding his AI, but the skimpy shorts are making this difficult. Nevertheless, repeated cries of "New balls, please!" show where their suspicions lie.


This post by John Fairbairn was liked by 4 people: Charlie, dsatkas, Fedya, frmor
Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: “Decision: case of using computer assistance in League A
Post #294 Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2018 12:43 am 
Judan

Posts: 6003
Location: Cambridge, UK
Liked others: 342
Was liked: 3217
Rank: UK 4 dan
KGS: Uberdude 4d
OGS: Uberdude 7d
theoldway wrote:
Uberdude wrote:

Now that I have a PC with gpu I let Leela analyse for 2.5m sims and q15 did rise from choice #18 to #5. So Leela did start to think about it more but was still far off local moves around the cutting stone (net and p7 peep top iirc).



2.5 m sims seems a huge amount of time to me. How many minutes it will take to calculate 2.5 m playouts? I guess that the player took much less time to play that move. didn't he?

It seems to me that q15 sequence worked only because of his opponent cooperation. Black should extend on M10 at some point in the process as suggested by Leela. The game would have been close this way.


2.5m sims of Leela 0.11 on my PC with a GeForce 1060 takes ~9 minutes. And yes Carlo generally plays pretty fast so doing that many sims live would be impossible (unless he had access to some monster computer in the cloud). A previous user (and myself) reported that Leela didn't find the q15 push, but wondered if it was due to insufficient resources. So I am answering the question that, even with millions of sims, it is only choice #5. Thus we have evidence that this move, which Lukan considered the most notable example of suspicious strength in the game (I didn't consider it so unlikely a good 4d could find it), is not a suggestion of Leela so is evidence Carlo wasn't cheating with Leela, at least at this point in the game. As you (and I previously) say if black had displayed more fighting spirit and extended at m10 then the game would have been more complicated and Carlo not been able to win so smoothly.


This post by Uberdude was liked by: theoldway
Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: “Decision: case of using computer assistance in League A
Post #295 Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2018 12:47 am 
Lives in gote

Posts: 398
Liked others: 77
Was liked: 123
Rank: igs 4d
RobertJasiek wrote:
Shenoute wrote:
It is also the account of a very frequent escaper. Not that this says much about the cheating case but if this is/was indeed Carlo Metta's account, the idea that such a player can be a referee during the EGC is disturbing/laughable...


We do not need rumours and speculation. Was it or was it not? What is the evidence of very frequent escaper? And do not repeat the cited talks, which show nothing but different, slightly heated opinions on whether undo is good.

You have apparently not check metta's KGS account. I did, so please refrain from talking about "repeating cited talks".

August 2014
37 rated games
5 forfeited games won by metta's opponent
4 interrupted games in the last 10 games

It seems safe to conclude that metta escaped at least 5 games out of 37, and maybe up to 9. Is this enough to use the words "frequent escaper"?

I agree that this should not be of any use when discussing the cheating accusation but since Carlo Metta's behaviour has been used as an argument since day 1 (see the facebook post quoted in post#1 of this thread) I think it is only fair to point these things out.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: “Decision: case of using computer assistance in League A
Post #296 Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2018 1:05 am 
Beginner

Posts: 14
Liked others: 4
Was liked: 8
Rank: 1 dan
Uberdude wrote:
2.5m sims of Leela 0.11 on my PC with a GeForce 1060 takes ~9 minutes. And yes Carlo generally plays pretty fast so doing that many sims live would be impossible (unless he had access to some monster computer in the cloud). A previous user (and myself) reported that Leela didn't find the q15 push, but wondered if it was due to insufficient resources. So I am answering the question that, even with millions of sims, it is only choice #5. Thus we have evidence that this move, which Lukan considered the most notable example of suspicious strength in the game (I didn't consider it so unlikely a good 4d could find it), is not a suggestion of Leela so is evidence Carlo wasn't cheating with Leela, at least at this point in the game. As you (and I previously) say if black had displayed more fighting spirit and extended at m10 then the game would have been more complicated and Carlo not been able to win so smoothly.


What about other strong engine suggestion? At the time Leela Zero was not on the scene, but Zen 6 or 7 was already there. Anyone here can take a look to Zen suggestion? If I remember correctly Zen suggests only its first 5 moves :(

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: “Decision: case of using computer assistance in League A
Post #297 Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2018 1:37 am 
Dies in gote

Posts: 31
Liked others: 3
Was liked: 7
Rank: 5 kyu
Javaness2 wrote:
So the new evidence needs new work before it can be treated seriously.
For point 1, I think it would be interested to plot rating performance per online event, and per offline event. Of course, you need several unbiased counter examples.
For point 2 lots more data needed to make a serious point. A huge work.
Point 3, I am satisfied with Carlo's explanation as to this point. In particular, I have to imagine that this game was already analyzed, so I don't see why it would be hidden.

Regarding #1 and #2, I suppose a lot of us have a morbid fascination with this case, but I think the effort is not worth it. Even if there was cheating here, I can't believe it was done in so stupid a way as to leave a clear trail behind. Each time new evidence is badly presented, it weakens the case.


I agree with you. Fisrt we need to establish solid method and anti-cheating technique otherwise any unclear attempt will weaken this case and also other future cases.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: “Decision: case of using computer assistance in League A
Post #298 Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2018 1:51 am 
Dies in gote

Posts: 31
Liked others: 3
Was liked: 7
Rank: 5 kyu
A little off topic but still related to future regulation: they say that Leela Zero runs on Android now!

https://www.reddit.com/r/baduk/comments ... n_android/

I wonder how this will affect real tournament conduct. Referee will need extra work and training :study:

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: “Decision: case of using computer assistance in League A
Post #299 Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2018 1:53 am 
Judan

Posts: 6003
Location: Cambridge, UK
Liked others: 342
Was liked: 3217
Rank: UK 4 dan
KGS: Uberdude 4d
OGS: Uberdude 7d
<moderator hat on>
Regarding Lukan's screenshot message on Carlo's character.

The forum rules say
Solomon wrote:
1. Personal Attacks
Remember the Golden Rule: do to others what you would like to be done to you. Trolling, flaming, bashing, or otherwise verbally attacking anyone is not allowed. When writing about a move that a member made, ensure all criticism is directed towards the member's move rather than the member. Also, please consider that not every member in the forums is a native English speaker as you write your post.

Does that post fall foul of this rule? I don't know, but I seem to recall we have removed milder personal criticisms. That post was reported to the mods, and also became pending approval (I'm not sure exactly how this works, sometimes (but not always) posts from new users are hidden until a mod approves them as an anti-spam measure, maybe being reported made it pending approval to show again). I messaged the author, saying that given the nature of the post I thought he/she should identify themselves so people can better judge if it is a credible witness or just some troll out for character assassination. They preferred to remain anonymous, so were okay with removing the message (or rather now, not approving it).

If this were a legal case, would this be "inadmissible evidence"? Should the moderators suppress it? I suppose lots of people have seen it now so the point is moot, but I hope this clarifies the situation.
<moderator hat off>

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: “Decision: case of using computer assistance in League A
Post #300 Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2018 1:56 am 
Dies in gote

Posts: 45
Liked others: 31
Was liked: 18
Rank: 2kyu
bugsti wrote:
I wonder how this will affect real tournament conduct. Referee will need extra work and training :study:


No training needed. Anyone caught using a phone during a game is simply disqualified.


This post by Gobang was liked by 2 people: Bill Spight, Hidoshito
Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 720 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 ... 36  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group