[computer-go] scaling up by boardsize

[Don Dailey]

I'm not against any size, but I would like to have a temporary 7x7
server to start with.   

One idea is to run only one server at a time (perhaps keeping 9x9 always
active too.)    We could even run each a month at a time and rotate
through them.   

I would suggest we leave the 9x9 server alone - but rotate by month like
so:

 January - 11x11
 February - 13x13
 March    - 15x15
 April    - 17x17
 May      - 19x19
 June     - 21x21
 July     - back to 11x11


I'm only temporarily interested in 7x7. I don't want a permanent 7x7
server and probably wouldn't want to revisit it (unless it suddenly
became interesting to the players with strong programs.)

- Don



On Sat, 2006-10-14 at 21:42 +0200, Benjamin Teuber wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Why not just the sizes 9, 13 and 19?
> I don't think so many different sizes are helpful in any way - besides, 
> there's enough work to be done to improve 9x9...
> Scaling algorithms to massive parallel clusters is of more interest to 
> me, no matter on what board-size.
> 
> Regards,
> Benjamin
> 
> David Doshay schrieb:
> > Hello All,
> >
> > It is my belief that the next big advance in computer Go will
> > come from an understanding of scaling relationships. With the
> > recent advances in MC programs, there is plenty of interesting
> > work to be done in how those programs will scale with more
> > time and/or memory.
> >
> > My question to all of you is the level of your interest in scaling
> > by board size.
> >
> > In order to help this effort, I am considering extending Don's
> > wonderfully helpful cgos by running servers at increasingly
> > larger board sizes. The obvious steps are the odd numbers
> > starting at 11 and increasing up towards 19, but I fear that
> > having too many cgosNxN servers will thin out participation
> > on each of the servers. The thing that makes the present 9x9
> > server so useful is the number of opponents that are available
> > at any time, and already I sometimes wish that I saw one or
> > two specific opponents available when their programmers do
> > not have them up and running.
> >
> > Is there interest? Do enough of you have sufficient computer
> > resources to play on several size boards at the same time?
> > There is no sense in having multiple versions of cgosNxN
> > unless there is a steady supply of a variety of programs.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > David
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > computer-go mailing list
> > computer-go at computer-go.org
> > http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> computer-go mailing list
> computer-go at computer-go.org
> http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/