It is currently Mon Sep 25, 2017 2:56 am

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 54 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3
Author Message
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Why do people still use the Chinese when it's clearly ba
Post #41 Posted: Sat Feb 20, 2016 3:36 am 
Lives with ko

Posts: 191
Liked others: 0
Was liked: 31
Rank: kgs 6 kyu
KGS: Pio2001
Joelnelsonb wrote:
If you're wondering what extra rules consist in territory scoring, consider this: No where in the stone-scoring rule book does it mention anything about the idea that if you surround an intersection, you get credit for it as a "point".


Hi, the chinese rule doesn't use stone scoring, but area scoring. It does say that surrounded intersections are worth one point each.

If you are talking about pure stone scoring, then, it seems to me that it has practical drawbacks : either you
-spend your time playing each game to the 360th move,
or you must
-Stop by agreement,
-Count the number of independently alive groups,
-Define what independent life is, which is exactly what we wanted to avoid ! :)

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Why do people still use the Chinese when it's clearly ba
Post #42 Posted: Sat Feb 20, 2016 3:44 am 
Lives in gote
User avatar

Posts: 385
Liked others: 13
Was liked: 24
OGS: Saint Ravitt
Area scoring + group tax = stone scoring.

_________________
Thinking like a go player during a game of chess is like bringing a knife to a gun-fight. Thinking like a chess player during a game of go feels like getting knifed while you're holding a gun...

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Why do people still use the Chinese when it's clearly ba
Post #43 Posted: Sat Sep 09, 2017 6:31 am 
Lives with ko

Posts: 166
Location: Spain
Liked others: 104
Was liked: 15
Rank: Low
GD Posts: 10
It seems to me that, since all intersections are scored in Chinese scoring (except those in seki), parity of dame isn't an issue. If the parity of dame changes, it's not like an extra point is added or removed, because it would be part of one of the players' scores anyway. In very close games, good play requires keeping track of score under any scoring system, and parity of dame points can be easily determined when you know the current scores. If the difference between both players' scores is even, parity of dame points is odd, and vice versa.

Also, assuming I'm wrong and it indeed makes the game more difficult, couldn't the dame be made irrelevant once and for all by using the button? Let's imagine a situation where there are only dame points left to play and we don't know their parity. Black goes first. If there is an even number of dame points, Black will take the button for a net result of 0.5 points for Black. If there is an odd number of dame points, Black will get one more point than White by filling the last dame, but then White will take the button for a net result of 0.5 points for Black, same as before.

_________________
Sum ergo non ero.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Why do people still use the Chinese when it's clearly ba
Post #44 Posted: Sat Sep 09, 2017 10:20 am 
Dies with sente

Posts: 84
Liked others: 10
Was liked: 10
handa711 wrote:
Counting meaningless stones as points! why?!


You are missing the point(s).

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Why do people still use the Chinese when it's clearly ba
Post #45 Posted: Mon Sep 11, 2017 8:16 pm 
Dies in gote

Posts: 24
Liked others: 1
Was liked: 1
In creating software to play go, it can be difficult to create code that can accurately decide which groups are alive and which are dead at the ends of games. One way to help a bot decide is to have the bot play inside its own territory until each eye is only 1 or 2 points in size. But, with Japanese rules, playing inside one's own territory costs points. Not so with Chinese rules. As a result, many bots are programmed to play using Chinese rules.

Unfortunately, this causes a tendency for games with bots to run long.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Why do people still use the Chinese when it's clearly ba
Post #46 Posted: Mon Sep 11, 2017 8:20 pm 
Judan

Posts: 7531
Liked others: 1371
Was liked: 1155
KGS: Kirby
Tygem: 커비라고해
Marathon wrote:
In creating software to play go, it can be difficult to create code that can accurately decide which groups are alive and which are dead at the ends of games. One way to help a bot decide is to have the bot play inside its own territory until each eye is only 1 or 2 points in size.


Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$Bcm1 dead?
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O X . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O X . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O X 3 |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , O X 1 |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O X X |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O O |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ----------------------------------------[/go]

_________________
Discipline is remembering what you want. -David Campbell

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject:
Post #47 Posted: Mon Sep 11, 2017 8:44 pm 
Judan
User avatar

Posts: 7534
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Liked others: 275
Was liked: 1676
GD Posts: 312
Quote:
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$B var 1. B dead?
$$ ---------------
$$ | . . 3 1 X O .
$$ | X X X X X O .
$$ | O O O O O O .
$$ | . . . , . . .[/go]
If (a)...(d) are the only legal moves remaining on the board:
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$B
$$ ---------------
$$ | a b c d X O ?
$$ | X X X X X O ?
$$ | O O O O O O ?
$$ | ? ? ? ? ? ? ?[/go]
- Randombot has exactly 25% chance to play :b1: on one of them (if Pass is not an option) ;
( or exactly 20% chance of one of [a,b,c,d,Pass] )
- AlphaGo tends to perform slightly better.
Quote:
One way to help a bot decide is to have the bot play inside its own territory until each eye is only 1 or 2 points in size.
Depending on the bot, this may or may not be part of the logic, and there may be additional criterias to decide a move. These other criterias may work in conjunction with the above technique, or they may override it in certain situations. So yes, var 1 is entirely possible with a Randombot.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Why do people still use the Chinese when it's clearly ba
Post #48 Posted: Mon Sep 11, 2017 9:16 pm 
Judan

Posts: 7531
Liked others: 1371
Was liked: 1155
KGS: Kirby
Tygem: 커비라고해
Thanks, Ed.

My post was partly sarcastic, and partly in hopes to trigger a response that gave more details about this class of algorithm:-)

_________________
Discipline is remembering what you want. -David Campbell

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject:
Post #49 Posted: Mon Sep 11, 2017 9:23 pm 
Judan
User avatar

Posts: 7534
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Liked others: 275
Was liked: 1676
GD Posts: 312
Hi Kirby, You're welcome. :)

It can be tricky sometimes to tell the tone of voice online.
Also, there may be a range of different levels in understanding of programming in the viewers, so sometimes it's OK to go back to the basics. :)

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re:
Post #50 Posted: Mon Sep 11, 2017 9:46 pm 
Judan

Posts: 7531
Liked others: 1371
Was liked: 1155
KGS: Kirby
Tygem: 커비라고해
EdLee wrote:
Hi Kirby, You're welcome. :)

It can be tricky sometimes to tell the tone of voice online.
Also, there may be a range of different levels in understanding of programming in the viewers, so sometimes it's OK to go back to the basics. :)


Agreed. Now, with a serious tone, does anyone know how a smart bot might select which moves to play within its own territory in order to determine life and death? It's not straightforward to me unless the algorithm does a search to iterate to a terminal state.

_________________
Discipline is remembering what you want. -David Campbell

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject:
Post #51 Posted: Mon Sep 11, 2017 10:00 pm 
Judan
User avatar

Posts: 7534
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Liked others: 275
Was liked: 1676
GD Posts: 312
Quote:
Now, with a serious tone, does anyone know how a smart bot might select which moves to play within its own territory in order to determine life and death? It's not straightforward to me...
Not only you; seems to be a non-trivial problem: at least CGoban and SmartGo sometimes get confused about the life-and-death (and dames), and still need human intervention in the final scoring. IGS' life-and-death marking is also not 100% automated and needs human clicking. Does anyone know how AlphaGo, Zen, Leela, etc. solved this ?

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Why do people still use the Chinese when it's clearly ba
Post #52 Posted: Tue Sep 12, 2017 6:30 am 
Lives in gote

Posts: 688
Location: Littleton, CO
Liked others: 241
Was liked: 194
Rank: KGS 3k
Universal go server handle: jeromie
Leela, at least, still makes errors marking life and death (though it's getting better), so I don't think it's a solved problem.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Why do people still use the Chinese when it's clearly ba
Post #53 Posted: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:27 am 
Tengen

Posts: 4424
Liked others: 0
Was liked: 588
Life and death status assessment by sampling (as done by NN/MC programs) does not "solve" problems. Problems are solved if the solution is verified or verifyable by a mathematical proof or mathematically proven algorithm.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Why do people still use the Chinese when it's clearly ba
Post #54 Posted: Tue Sep 12, 2017 2:53 pm 
Dies in gote

Posts: 24
Liked others: 1
Was liked: 1
Kirby wrote:
Marathon wrote:
In creating software to play go, it can be difficult to create code that can accurately decide which groups are alive and which are dead at the ends of games. One way to help a bot decide is to have the bot play inside its own territory until each eye is only 1 or 2 points in size.


Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$Bcm1 dead?
$$ ------------
$$ . . O X . |
$$ . . O X . |
$$ . . O X 3 |
$$ . , O X 1 |
$$ . . O X X |
$$ . . O O O |
$$ . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . |
$$
$$ -----------[/go]


Well, some bots might actually do that. But, more likely, a bot would split single eyes, so would start with a stone at T7 or T6.

Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 54 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


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