Author: Mridul Muralidharan
Date: 03:11:21 09/12/05
Go up one level in this thread
On September 12, 2005 at 02:05:40, Peter McKenzie wrote: >Hi All, > >I thought some of you might be interested my progress in computer Go. My >program is called Gonzo and plays on the KGS Go Server (http://kgs.kiseido.com). > >There is a regular 'bot' tournament run on KGS every month. The tournament >alternates between 9x9 Go and 19x19 Go. In the most recent 9x9 tournament (4 >Sept) my program caused a minor upset by finishing in a tie for 1st place with >GNU Go and viking5. Gonzo certainly had its share of luck, but a win is a win >so I'll take it :-) > >Details of the tournament are here: > >http://www.weddslist.com/kgs/past/6/index.html > >The computer Go world is quite different to the computer chess world. Even the >best programs aren't very strong and can, on occasion, play really badly. > >One good thing is the possibility of playing on different board sizes. 19x19 >can be quite daunting and, with over 200 legal moves for much of the game, is >tough for search based programs. 9x9 and 13x13 games are quite common, and >meaningful games can even be played on boards as small as 5x5. > >Another interesting thing is the wide variety of techniques being used in >various programs. These include traditional (global) alpha/beta searching, >local search, Monte Carlo techniques, combinations of search and Monte Carlo, >neural networks, genetic algorithms, etc. > >A strange thing about computer Go is the whole process of finishing the game and >deciding who won. This is much more complex than in chess and in part a >reflection of the state of the wider Go world where there are several slightly >different versions of the rules used. In practice (for humans), the different >rulesets don't have much effect but it certainly adds another element of >compexity for the programmer. > >Most (but not all) computer Go tournaments use Chinese rules because these don't >punish you from playing extra stones at the end of the game (instead of >passing). However, you'll want your program to pass 'early' (rather than play >all the stones that it possibly could) because otherwise humans won't want to >play it. > >Once your program has passed (and the opponent has too) you then need to get the >program to agree with the opponent as to which stones are 'dead'. This is >non-trivial and it is possible there will be a disagreement at which time the >players must somehow resolve their differences. Usually this means restarting >the game and playing some more stones to clarify the situation. > >Anyway, if you are (or were) a computer chess programmer looking for a new >challenge, you might want to look at computer Go. There is a bit of effort >required to get up to speed with the game, but even that is an interesting >experience that will twist your grey matter in new ways and give you an insight >into Oriental culture and thinking. > >Chess is a battle, Go is a war... > >cheers, >Peter Really nice report ! I love the last line "Chess is a battle, Go is a war..." brilliant :) Thanks, Mridul
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.