A three-game match will be played on KGS between Franz-Josef Dickhut, German 6-dan, and Crazy Stone, 6-dan program by Rémi Coulom.

It will be played over three Saturdays, October 4th 11th and 18th, starting at 16:00 CEST, which I believe is 14:00 UTC. You will be able to watch the games as they are played on KGS, in the 'Computer Go' room. The players' KGS accounts are 'fj' and 'CrazyStone'. The games will be even, with 6.5 komi, and one hour each plus five 40-second byoyomi periods.

The event is sponsored by codecentric, and called the "codecentric go challenge 2014". You can read the transcript of interviews with Franz-Josef and Rémi at https://blog.codecentric.de/en/2014/10/ ... mi-coulom/ - both think Franz-Josef is more likely to win. Once each game has been played, a commentary will become available at https://go.codecentric.de/ .

Crazy Stone will be running on 20 cores, on which it can achieve about 40,000 playouts a second.

Sounds interesting. I have so many questions - here are a few:
1. If this is a special event - how did crazy stone get its rank?
2. Who decides on the number of cores/hardware/time? Does it factor into the rank?
3. How does crazy stone use its time (Does it play the same time each move, does it use all the time? Does it read during its opponents time?)

(Not trolling just curious)

CrazyStone is 6d on KGS (in fast games -- 10 x 15s byoyomis): http://www.gokgs.com/gameArchives.jsp?u ... 14&month=3

I don't know the details of how they picked the hardware. The blog makes it sound like Remi is just using what he has available to him through his university. Yes it has a "very big strength difference" [quoting Remi]. I think CrazyStone that got 6d on KGS was probably already using a similar cluster of machines to get that rating though, so I wouldn't expect it to suddenly be much stronger. Also that 6d is on blitz games, the bots typically lose about 1 kgs stone when playing slower time controls.

I'm looking forward to the games, I hope CrazyStone can win at least 1. But I wouldn't be surprised if it lost all 3.

To answer the third question (yoyoma has given good answers to the first two): Crazy Stone does time management, just as human players do. It spends more time on mid-game moves than on end-game moves; the time it spends it influenced by how much it has left; it plays obvious moves faster than difficult ones. Thinking in the opponent's time is called "pondering" by computer Go people - I do not know whether Crazy Stone ponders.

Correction:

It's a five-game match. The first three games are scheduled for October 4th, 11th, 18th. The other two (which may not be needed) have not yet been scheduled.

And CrazyStone won the first game by 1.5.

_________________
Occupy Babel!

CrazyStone was leading by a lot more but did the traditional Monte Carlo bot points haemorrhaging:

CS does that a lot actually. If it is leading and is certain in victory it will give you points.

Same thing happened against Yoda Norimoto when cs was winning by 10 points or so but in the endgame it won only by few points.

Yoda later said that he was grateful towards the bot since it reduced the winning margin.

These are CrazyStone's analysis on the game
http://remi.coulom.free.fr/CrazyStone/a ... index.html

BTW, it seems the first game was played on Rémi 8 core desktop computer.

Interesting. I look forward to the publication of "Crazy Stone: The Only Move"

See this evaluation of move 119.

It is amazing how little calculation is given to moves other than R10 at that point.

[0.489239 = P(B Wins)]

Is this an estimation of the value of komi or does CrazyStone have some confidence issues?

4-4 was a fine move CStone
No need to doubt yourself.

edit: Also for those lazier than me

16:00 CEST is 7AM west coast. 10 AM east coast. (If I'm reading this chart correctly...)

From the 1,024,000 playouts, which CrasyStone calculated, Black won 500,980.

Another example:
nnn Xm 100,000 0.75

From 100,000 playouts of CrasyStone, Black won 75,000.


From the programme's point of view, P(B Wins) is the probability of a Black win, with the given move played next.

_________________
The really most difficult Go problem ever: https://igohatsuyoron120.de/index.htm
Igo Hatsuyōron #120 (really solved by KataGo)

Very interesting what is the current status? I find this match most interesting. I believe we are less than 5 years away from a new worlds best player..... Of course it makes me sad....

_________________
Walla Walla GO Club -(on FB)

We play because we enjoy the beauty of the game, the snap and feel of real stones, and meeting interesting people. Hope to see ya there! お願いします!

Anthony

Franz-Josef Dickhut is ahead 2 games to 1. You can look at the games and read a bit of commentary here: https://go.codecentric.de/

_________________
Patience, grasshopper.

Ty I will enjoy looking it up. Glad to see flesh and bones, is ahead.

_________________
Walla Walla GO Club -(on FB)

We play because we enjoy the beauty of the game, the snap and feel of real stones, and meeting interesting people. Hope to see ya there! お願いします!

Anthony

And fj takes it 3-1. Not sure why crazystone allowed such a big group to die, because it was very hard to win after that, even with the substantial outside influence it got.

https://go.codecentric.de/game-4/

Crazystone had several disconnections during the game.

After the first disconnect (and subsequent reconnect), appearently a second instance of Crazystone was running in the background (I think all the way till the second disconnect, you can read about this in the KGS kibitz from the end of the game), so that for about 1/3 of the game Crazystone was running on merely half the processing power/memory it should have been able to use.

Same thing happens to me sometimes...

_________________
- Brady
Want to see videos of low-dan mistakes and what to learn from them? Brady's Blunders

so? how did this end?

Judging from the results in KGS Archive, it ended 2-1 or 3-1 for the human side.
https://www.gokgs.com/gameArchives.jsp?user=fj&year=2014&month=10

Cheers,
Vesa