[computer-go] CGOS 5 minute server

[Christian Nilsson]

On 4/19/07, Rémi Coulom <Remi.Coulom at univ-lille3.fr> wrote:
> Christian Nilsson wrote:
> > Hello all,
> >
> > I've recently unleashed a few versions of my program "Haste" on CGOS.
> > Seeing their ratings sparked a bit of curiosity about the relative
> > ratings they achieved. In self-play ( thousands of games ) they differ
> > by more than twice as many ELO-points as on the server.
> I don't test with self play, but I am not very surprised by the
> difference you observe.
> >
> > I know it's bad to use self-play as a measure of improvement... but
> > I'd still like to know if anyone else is seeing this rather large
> > difference in self-play vs. CGOS. After all, most programs on CGOS
> > appear to be using MonteCarlo/UCT with either light, medium or heavy
> > playouts. Making them similar in many ways.
> The presence of a few GNU Go's on CGOS moderates this phenomenon. For
> instance, you can notice that CrazyStone-Fast has a score of 23/23
> against Fatman (1800) and 9/17 against GNU Go 3.7.9 (1814). The reverse
> is true for weaker bots. For instance Haste-10k-pure has 0/21 against
> FatMan and  4/21 against GNU. These number may not be extremely
> significant, but I believe they indicate a strong tendency.
>
> That makes GNU Go a very good sparring partner for MC program: whatever
> you do, there is little risk of overfitting GNU, because it works in
> such a different way.

After running some tests against GNU Go I'm getting quite different
results than in self-play. It seems I've been focusing on features
that gave self-play a boost, but not general strength. Time to start
over. :)


> Rémi
> _______________________________________________
> computer-go mailing list
> computer-go at computer-go.org
> http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
>