[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [gnugo-devel] Owl (performance) tuning
From: |
bump |
Subject: |
Re: [gnugo-devel] Owl (performance) tuning |
Date: |
Mon, 23 Dec 2002 11:43:45 -0800 |
> owl:46 FAIL
>
> Well, I tried my best but I couldn't find the refutation of E1. If a dan
> player could tell me, I would try again to correct the problem.
You mean that GNU finds a defense but it's at E1 instead of one
of the listed moves?
E1 looks like a valid defense and could be added to the accepted
moves.
> viking:1 FAIL
>
> Here, I think that the PASS is a lucky one, based on the uncertainty of an
> attack on P17. IMO, whether O15 has a chance to kill or not shouldn't matter,
> specially since I believe that it actually doesn't kill, if the defender
> doesn't tenuki. Also, E4 looks a bit overvalued to me.
>
> But it's a very serious problem, since O15 is almost mandatory in such
> positions. Unfortunately, JH431 doesn't match because of the additional
> stone at Q14. And I guess, we don't have the right tools to generate
> following from sgf files.
The automatically generated patterns are always rectangular. So
should add a pattern such as the one you propose to fuseki.db.
I wouldn't play E4 but C3 instead, locally.
> strategy:55 FAIL
>
> If we observe that CVS also plays C14 if the owl node limit is increased
> to 1200, then we must conclude that this FAIL is accidental. The performance
> gain just makes the problem visible.
I think you mean strategy2:55. C14 looks possibly playable but C12 is a much
clearer answer. But at least it doesn't tenuki.
Dan