Re: [computer-go] Protocol B

[drd@xxxxxxx]

Hi Peter,

I agree with you on the explicit resolve genmove command.   

Without the command, the only thing a program needs to know is if the last 2 
moves were pass moves.   If they were, we are in a resolution phase.  It's 
that easy without the command.  

However,  I also believe there is value in making it explicit.   It's hard to 
argue with a command that directly informs the program of a dispute.

For those who think this command is complicated, I would like to point out 
that it doesn't require anything extra over the current William Shubert" 
protocol.    In a nutshell,  if the server issue's a kgs-genmove_cleanup 
command,  your program generates a normal move instead of a pass (unless it 
of course it believes everything is resolved.)  

There is one issue that I would like to point out that doesn't effect this 
protocol, or the final results but that we  might want to put in our programs 
as a convenience.   Once you reach a resolution phase,  it might be good for 
your engine to implicitly maintain that phase until at least the first 
capture move to prevent some extra thrashing around with pass moves.
 

Don




On Thursday 28 July 2005 1:24 am, Peter McKenzie wrote:
> >From: drd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >Reply-To: computer-go <computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >To: computer-go <computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >Subject: Re: [computer-go] Protocol B
> >Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 22:32:57 -0400
> >
> >I also have given this further thought.   I'm now slightly in favor of
> >actually coming to an agreement on which stones are dead using the same
> >basic
> >protocol you are specifying here.
>
> I gave it a little extra thought too and came to the same conclusion.  My
> reasoning is simply that KGS needs this information to do its end of game
> scoring, and we should be doing everything we can (within reason) to work
> in with the way KGS works.  After all, it is wms who ultimately decides to
> implement (or not) the server side of the protocol.
>
> On the other point you raised, I personally prefer to have an explicit
> resolve-disagreement-genmove (i.e. KGS-genmove_cleanup) command rather than
> rely on the program to infer it.  I think this would make the protocol
> easier for developers to use/debug with no significant downside.
>
> Btw, contrary some comments I made a while back, I think that supporting
> protocol B wouldn't be any harder than supporting protocol A.  At least
> that is the case with my program.
>
> cheers,
> Peter
>
> >The reason?   Just an extra nicety for marking the board at the end of the
> >game.    Although the winner/loser result is by far the most important, 
> > it is probably very useful "for the record" to understand exactly how the
> > game was scored,  perhaps for games database research.    When a game has
> > been finished,  it's a special convenience for any observer to see how
> > the board was actually marked and it takes the pressure off of automated
> > software to do
> >this.   As an example, how would Nicks program mark the final position if
> >there was no reporting of dead stones?
> >
> >Also, it would make life easier for reporting game results in general,
> >because people usually care about the actual area score and it's usually
> >recorded in databases.
> >
> >It's not a big deal to me,  it's more important to have a protocol but I
> >can't
> >help feel that if we adopted this protocol,  we might regret not having
> > the stone information.
> >
> >Don
> >
> >On Wednesday 27 July 2005 5:15 pm, David G Doshay wrote:
> > > Upon just a little more reflection, I think that this protocol only
> > > needs
> > > to be used if the disagreement on the score amounts to a disagreement
> > > about the winner.
> > >
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > David
> > >
> > > On 27, Jul 2005, at 1:22 PM, David G Doshay wrote:
> > > > (pass - pass)
> > > > ?score?
> > > > if agree
> > > > 	no problem, game over
> > > > if disagree
> > > > 	resolve-disagreement-genmove
> > > > 	if reply is pass
> > > > 		resolve-disagreement-genmove
> > > > 		if reply is pass
> > > > 			game over, everyone alive
> > > > 		if reply is not pass
> > > > 			continue game with genmove
> > > > 	if reply is not pass
> > > > 		continue game with genmove
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > computer-go mailing list
> > > computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >computer-go mailing list
> >computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Find the coolest online games @ http://xtramsn.co.nz/gaming
>
> _______________________________________________
> computer-go mailing list
> computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/