Do q5go databases have a tagging feature? That is one of my favorite Kombilo features. It allows games to be tagged as 'Seen' or tagged by particular opening/joseki/handicap etc...

Not yet. I did notice that games got greyed out in the list when you looked at them, and I was planning to do that as well, but I don't even recall seeing a more involved tagging feature.

Now that we combine search with analysis we should be thinking of new capabilities. One that comes to mind would be to take a position, search the database, and automatically analyze and display the X most frequent continuations that humans have played historically. What do you think? Would such a thing be possible?

_________________
Dave Sigaty
"Short-lived are both the praiser and the praised, and rememberer and the remembered..."
- Marcus Aurelius; Meditations, VIII 21

I'm certainly not opposed to adding useful features, but I'm not entirely sure what you have in mind beyond what is already there. When you say "automatically", do you imagine this as a sort of live analysis feature like engine analysis? I guess I'm asking for a more detailed description.

Now we have the ability to put a position on the board and analyze it using an engine like Katago...

Alternatively we have the ability to take that same position and search a database of human games like GoGoD...

What I am imagining is the ability to take for example the top five human choices, explicitly send them to the analysis engine, and get back the winrate/score estimate for those five choices.

q5go might display the analysis of the top X moves on the board, or it might add the analysis to the bar chart of results on the right side of the search screen.
The position that I chose is not ideal perhaps, because all the main human choices are already in the analysis picture above. However, there are situations where they are not.

This is really just off the top of my head. I was in the process of thinking of what existing capabilities in kombilo I would prioritize for support by q5go. However, then I thought that we should be looking for new capabilities for this new tool. Capabilities that kombilo cannot provide.

_________________
Dave Sigaty
"Short-lived are both the praiser and the praised, and rememberer and the remembered..."
- Marcus Aurelius; Meditations, VIII 21

Thanks, I think I understand now. That's slightly different than what I had pictured first - I was thinking of adding "Database" to the list of engines available in the normal board window and then displaying the search results as if they had come from an engine, with winrates and such.
No reason we couldn't do both, although it'll probably take some time to get these things working.

One thing that I would love to see as an improvement on kombilo would be better export of search results in a file. I have done a lot of large-scale historical searches for some of my posts on fuseki development, player histories, and so forth. I am probably an outlier in this regard. But so what!

Right now I can hit "include game list" when I am exporting a search result. This adds the list to the text box of results. I copy and paste the list into Excel (in my case) but then have to go through the process of parsing the list. Kombilo currently reports the White and Black players as something like "Cho Han-seung - Jiang Weijie", which requires parsing (and be careful if some of the players names include the same dash that is used to separate the two names, as Cho's does here!).

Much better would be to output a simple CSV file with each field distinct. I would recommend that at least the following items be included:
White player, Black player, winner (this would be simply W,B,J,N,U), result (this would be something like W+2.5), komi, date, move number (where the position occurs in the game, e.g. 5 for move 5), continuation (A, B, etc.).

_________________
Dave Sigaty
"Short-lived are both the praiser and the praised, and rememberer and the remembered..."
- Marcus Aurelius; Meditations, VIII 21

I think I would not distinguish winner and result and just quote the SGF result field. It's an arbitrary string, and I think a user who wants to use such a CSV file is in a better position to interpret the results.
For continuation - A, B, C, or coordinates? I guess a checkbox in the export dialog could sort that out.
I'll add it to the list. For the moment I just want to release a 2.0 version with what is there now, but after that I'll look into improvements.

I stuck results into the list because it is there. However, I think that the only time I was interested in the actual point spread was in a post on half point wins. In my experience winner as a single letter is much more useful. If only result is given, the user always has to parse that field. So I would lobby for doing the heavy lifting once in your code and let the lazy analyst (me) "take it EZ"!

Of course there is no rush on this. I am in awe of the effort that you have put into this program over the years. Please, keep it up and make sure that it remains personally rewarding for you.

_________________
Dave Sigaty
"Short-lived are both the praiser and the praised, and rememberer and the remembered..."
- Marcus Aurelius; Meditations, VIII 21

I've now uploaded the current state as a 2.0 release.

there is a version of KataGo for a board up to 37x37! https://github.com/lightvector/KataGo/i ... -809341260
your wonderful program only supports up to 36x36. please do up to 37x37!

bernds can you make 37x37?

I've pushed an update yesterday. The automatic builds unfortunately don't work anymore due to some changes at Github, so no binaries yet.

@bernds
thanks a lot! is it possible for a new release or version for Windows to appear within a month? or two?

I'll try to get to it.

@bernds
many thanks! even if you have to wait a few months

KataGo compiled @Friday9i, works even on a 100x100 board. (https://github.com/lightvector/KataGo/i ... -810368706)
but a reasonable game is probably somewhere up to 60x60. @Friday9i wants to train the network on big boards. Perhaps it makes sense (only for a game or a match of engines, due to the limitation of sgf) to raise the limit not to 52, but to 100?

I've uploaded a 2.1 release.

Board sizes larger than 52 run into issues with coordinates in SGF files - all the letters are taken. I also kind of don't believe that anyone will discover something new in a 100x100 game that isn't already there in 40x40. At some point I no longer see the point

thanks a lot!!! 52x52 works, but only when playing against a computer. computer vs computer is still 52x36. very interesting to watch engine matches! huge request, please make 52x52 !!!

Aww, too many dialogs to look through and I missed one