Re: [computer-go] 2nd KGS Computer Go Tournament

[Mark Boon <tesujisoftware@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 5/9/05, Nick Wedd <nick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> >Sure you can; if there is a dispute regarding a seki (one side claiming the
> >other is dead) you play it out. Now the proper playout is: pass; pass.
> >in which case, since neither side has made any non-pass moves,
> >the position is (correctly) scored as-is. And if one side does make moves,
> >then it's their loss:)
> 
> I do not trust bots (let alone pairs of bots) to handle genuine disputes
> correctly.  I do trust myself to handle them correctly.
> 
> I do not think anyone will try to add dispute-negotiation code to their
> bot.  But if anyone is daft enough to do this, I shall insist that they
> keep it switched off for any event that I am organising.
> 

For informal events it's fine to have a human supervisor to be the
judge of unclear situations. The computer-Go community is still such
that I expect this to go well for quite a bit longer, provided no
large sums of money are involved.

For events that really matter it won't be that easy. Fortunately
disputes can be resolved very easily, especially by computers. Any
stone on the board after some number of consecutive passes can be
considered alive. I think any other dispute-resolving system is bound
to encounter unexpected problems, so you might just as well keep it as
simple as possible.

Computers don't mind this tedious process, so I don't see it as a
problem to require this. And the implementation is relatively easy. By
that I mean if a program is competing for some top-prize, it will only
be a very small percentage of the total development time that needs to
be assigned to this end-phase.
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/