[computer-go] 19x19 Study

[Don Dailey]

They seem under-rated to me also.   Bayeselo pushes the ratings together
because that is apparently a valid initial assumption.   With enough
games I believe that effect goes away.

I could test that theory with some work.    Unless there is a way to
turn that off in bayelo (I don't see it) I could rate them with my own
program.

Perhaps I will do that test.

- Don


Sylvain Gelly wrote:
>
>     but not linearly and you can see a nice gradual curve in the plot.
>
>     Now we have something we can argue about for weeks.   Why is it not
>     mostly linear?   Could it be the memory issue I just mentioned?   
>
>
> Hi Don and all participants to that study, that is very interesting!
>
> The memory constrains are certainly a valid hypothesis, especially the
> default settings of the release are rather conservative on that side,
> because it seemed better to have a weaker player than begin to make
> the player's machine swapping... Those settings are rather fitting
> your memory constrains as well, so it is fine.
>
> Reading your email and looking at the curve, I wonder if one possible
> explanation could be an artifact on how the ratings are computed? My
> question is: what curve would we see for that study if the involved
> players were exactly linearly scalable? That seems silly, but I
> wondered if there were an underestimating of higher levels, because of
> the way the bayeselo works. I am also looking at the curve after the
> 5-6th level (~gnugo), as behavior may be different for very low levels.
>
> I don't know if my hypothesis makes sense.
> Sylvain
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> computer-go mailing list
> computer-go at computer-go.org
> http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/