Re: [computer-go] Third KGS tournament: game-end protocol

[Gunnar Farnebäck <gunnar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Nick wrote:
> The recent third KGS Computer Go Tournament did not see any bot resume 
> play to establish its claims about status.  What did happen, in four of 
> the games, was that two bots disagreed about the status of at least one 
> group, and rather than resume play, they alternately and repeatedly 
> asserted their claim by marking the disputed group(s) as dead and as 
> alive.  In the least clear such case, the disputed group was unsettled: 
> it had one eye, and could make, or be denied, a second eye.  In the 
> clearest such case, the disputed group had 26 foolproof eyes.  Six of 
> the eight bots in the Formal division became involved in these 
> arguments, and one risked missing its game in the next round, preferring 
> to continue to argue.

As far as I can see, the less than graceful behaviour in the case of a
dispute is not the bots' fault but a misfeature in kgsGtp and/or the
server. Since there apparently never were any cleanup moves generated,
kgsGtp had no reason to ask the bots about the status more than once
(and possibly it didn't) and when they didn't agree (possibly because
one of the bots didn't implement final_status_list) and didn't manage
to resume, there really was no good reason for the server to start
blinking the stones indefinitely. It would have made a lot more sense
for the server to interrupt the game somehow and notify the tournament
organizer.

/Gunnar
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/