[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [gnugo-devel] 3.4 vs 3.6 against MFG
From: |
bump |
Subject: |
Re: [gnugo-devel] 3.4 vs 3.6 against MFG |
Date: |
Mon, 7 Mar 2005 16:32:40 -0800 |
> We started collecting these games as a baseline from
> which to judge the changes to move ordering and eval
> that SlugGo does. From these few games it looks like
> 3.6 against MFG is almost the same as SlugGo against
> MFG.
I wonder if your copy of Many Faces is somehow
broke. For example, look at move 104 in the last game,
throwing away the corner. (B still has a chance to
live at move 110.)
Yes, GNU Go sometimes makes moves that are just as
bad as this when the owl code misfires. But on the
whole this B doesn't seem to play as positively as
usual from Many Faces. It seems to have a different
style than I expect. Does it have a version number?
Dan
- [gnugo-devel] 3.4 vs 3.6 against MFG, David G Doshay, 2005/03/07
- Re: [gnugo-devel] 3.4 vs 3.6 against MFG, bump, 2005/03/07
- Re: [gnugo-devel] 3.4 vs 3.6 against MFG, Gunnar Farnebäck, 2005/03/07
- Re: [gnugo-devel] 3.4 vs 3.6 against MFG, David G Doshay, 2005/03/07
- Re: [gnugo-devel] 3.4 vs 3.6 against MFG,
bump <=
- Re: [gnugo-devel] 3.4 vs 3.6 against MFG, David G Doshay, 2005/03/07
- RE: [gnugo-devel] 3.4 vs 3.6 against MFG, David Fotland, 2005/03/07
- Re: [gnugo-devel] 3.4 vs 3.6 against MFG, David G Doshay, 2005/03/08
- Stupid us (was Re: [gnugo-devel] 3.4 vs 3.6 against MFG), David G Doshay, 2005/03/08
- Re: Stupid us (was Re: [gnugo-devel] 3.4 vs 3.6 against MFG), Pierce T . Wetter III, 2005/03/08
- RE: Stupid us (was Re: [gnugo-devel] 3.4 vs 3.6 against MFG), David Fotland, 2005/03/08
- Re: Stupid us (was Re: [gnugo-devel] 3.4 vs 3.6 against MFG), David G Doshay, 2005/03/09
- RE: Stupid us (was Re: [gnugo-devel] 3.4 vs 3.6 against MFG), David Fotland, 2005/03/09
- Re: Stupid us (was Re: [gnugo-devel] 3.4 vs 3.6 against MFG), David G Doshay, 2005/03/09
- Re: Stupid us (was Re: [gnugo-devel] 3.4 vs 3.6 against MFG), David G Doshay, 2005/03/09