Life In 19x19 http://www.lifein19x19.com/ |
|
Opening problems for AI: Problem 8 http://www.lifein19x19.com/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=17576 |
Page 1 of 1 |
Author: | Bill Spight [ Fri Jun 19, 2020 7:20 am ] |
Post subject: | Opening problems for AI: Problem 8 |
Sakata Eio was one of those players who went his own way, and rather successfully, being one of the winningest players of all time. In the diagrammed position, from GoGoD 1953-03-25a, versus Takagawa, there are a number of standard plays. Sakata picked one that Elf reckons lost 22½% to par. |
Author: | hyperpape [ Fri Jun 19, 2020 7:27 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Opening problems for AI: Problem 8 |
Author: | Bill Spight [ Fri Jun 19, 2020 7:51 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Opening problems for AI: Problem 8 |
Author: | John Fairbairn [ Fri Jun 19, 2020 11:12 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Opening problems for AI: Problem 8 |
Quote: What is shocking is how bad the boshi seems to be by comparison. I feel shocked, too, but an important caveat for this crop of positions is that they are from an era with 4.5 komi (or sometimes 0). Another point is that there were rather few players in those days and they met each a lot. Sakata and Takagawa played each other over 100 times. They were very familiar with each other's styles. It was therefore common to play the man as much as the board. Kitani seemed specially addicted to this, but he was far from alone. I don't know how much Sakata indulged in it, but playing a boshi (a cap) against Boshi no Takagawa has the hallmarks. It may of course be that, by adjusting for komi size, the win rate would change by exactly the same extent for both the cap and the 3-3 move. But I'd be interested to hear whether it's possible that the change would vary in each case, In other words, could changing the komi alter, say, the balance between the corners and the centre? |
Author: | Uberdude [ Fri Jun 19, 2020 12:18 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Opening problems for AI: Problem 8 |
John Fairbairn wrote: Quote: What is shocking is how bad the boshi seems to be by comparison. It may of course be that, by adjusting for komi size, the win rate would change by exactly the same extent for both the cap and the 3-3 move. But I'd be interested to hear whether it's possible that the change would vary in each case, In other words, could changing the komi alter, say, the balance between the corners and the centre? KataGo to the rescue! Using 7.5 komi (and Chinese rules, I don't know how to change to Japanese), KG thinks (at 50k playouts) the shimari is 54.0% for white or a lead of 0.6 points. A very close second (53.8%) is just one space away from the bad cap, the classic bot attachment at k16, a move that's actually sente. After the cap and black's punishment invasion at bottom left 3-3, white's next move (KG agrees with Elf d5, I keep same player to play) is down to 41.8% and black leads 1.0 points. So a loss of 12.2% or 1.6 points. Using 4.5 komi, KG still wants to shimari, with 33.4% and black leads 2.2 points. After the cap best play is still the same, black 3-3, white knight press at d5 is now 22.8% or 4.2 points lead for black. So a loss of 10.6% or 2.0 points. So pretty similar, though strangely more points loss with a smaller winrate loss. Maybe the Chinese rules lack of sharpness vs Japanese effect, or that measuring changes in percentage points rather than fractional change as you approach 0 distorts relative changes (2% to 1% is a halving of winrate whereas 50% to 49% is not much)? P.S. Another human mistake that could have been avoided by following the Leela Zero Opening Gospel ![]() |
Author: | lightvector [ Fri Jun 19, 2020 1:04 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Opening problems for AI: Problem 8 |
@Uberdude - change to Japanese rules by pressing "E" in Lizzie to open the GTP console and type "kata-set-rules japanese" into it and hit enter. Ideally the GUI would send such commands automatically based on the rules in an SGF file... but unfortunately the GTP protocol never built in any support for rules, so despite KataGo having supported this GTP extension for a few months now, it seems many GUI programs haven't implemented it, because - granted - it is an extension and not part of the "official" protocol. Alternatively, in your gtp.cfg or gtp_example.cfg or default_gtp.cfg, edit it to be "rules=japanese": https://github.com/lightvector/KataGo/b ... le.cfg#L88 It will use whatever rules you put here each time it starts up. You can still of course dynamically change it by typing in the GTP console too. |
Author: | Bill Spight [ Fri Jun 19, 2020 2:40 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Opening problems for AI: Problem 8 |
John Fairbairn wrote: It may of course be that, by adjusting for komi size, the win rate would change by exactly the same extent for both the cap and the 3-3 move. But I'd be interested to hear whether it's possible that the change would vary in each case, In other words, could changing the komi alter, say, the balance between the corners and the centre? I wish to emphasize, if I haven't done so enough already, that my purpose is not to show how bad the players were, but how opening theory may change in the AI era. Yes, it is a good idea to see how komi matters and to judge plays accordingly. ![]() In doing the research for these problems, I have found out a couple of interesting things. First, opening theory of the 20th century, aside from considering new opening patterns, was largely based upon best play in the 19th century, even though those games were played without komi. Second, looking at those ancient plays in the Elf commentaries revealed that Elf liked many of those moves in the 19th century games that it didn't like in the 20th century games. Even though they were no komi games. ![]() |
Author: | ez4u [ Fri Jun 19, 2020 5:44 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Opening problems for AI: Problem 8 |
As Uberdude wrote above, katago calculates that attaching on top of the extension in the original position is almost equivalent to playing in the lower left. We should also be aware of what comes before that. In the position below, katago calculates that playing ![]() ![]() ![]() Step by step from ![]() ![]() [/quote] |
Author: | Bill Spight [ Fri Jun 19, 2020 7:35 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Opening problems for AI: Problem 8 |
ez4u wrote: A year later Takagawa reached the position after 6 against Sugiuchi Masao. Instead of the low ![]() Good question! ![]() ![]() |
Author: | Uberdude [ Sat Jun 20, 2020 9:17 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Opening problems for AI: Problem 8 |
ez4u wrote: A year later Takagawa reached the position after 6 against Sugiuchi Masao. Instead of the low ![]() Makes me wonder if Takagawa felt uncomfortable after Sakata's cap and so wanted to play high instead to prevent it. So even if Sakata's move was a mistake according to Elf and other bots, playing the man not the board it may have been an excellent one. |
Author: | Bill Spight [ Sat Jun 20, 2020 9:55 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Opening problems for AI: Problem 8 |
Uberdude wrote: ez4u wrote: A year later Takagawa reached the position after 6 against Sugiuchi Masao. Instead of the low ![]() Makes me wonder if Takagawa felt uncomfortable after Sakata's cap and so wanted to play high instead to prevent it. So even if Sakata's move was a mistake according to Elf and other bots, playing the man not the board it may have been an excellent one. Sakata may or may not have been turning the tables on Boshi no Takagawa, but the boshi strikes me as Sakata's leave'em bleeding style, anyway. ![]() |
Author: | dhu163 [ Fri Jun 04, 2021 9:56 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Opening problems for AI: Problem 8 |
Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ] |
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |