[gnugo-devel] patch trevor_start_1_10.3

[Trevor Morris]

I think this patch got overlooked.
Here's the URL again:
  http://www.public32.com/games/go/trevor_strat_1_10.3
-Trevor

At 03:32 PM 10/10/2001 -0400, Trevor Morris wrote:
>Before I delve deeper into the test case cleanup, I'd like folks
>opinion of the approach I'm taking:
> - Keep all reference comments in the *.tst files themselves as
>   comments, instead of in separate files like STRATEGY, etc.
> - Begin using a standard notation to prioritize and categorize
>   the test cases.  Notably, CATEGORY, DESCRIPTION, and SEVERITY
>   fields.  See the patch below for examples.
>
>You can see examples in the following patch.
>
>You can also see the comments showing up in action by following
>the strategy.tst failure links on the new and improved:
>  http://www.public32.com/regress/
>Most notably are the markers to indicate the bad and good moves,
>as well as the category, description, and severity sections.
>
>Here's the patch:
>  http://www.public32.com/games/go/trevor_strat_1_10.3
>
>
>Index: strategy.tst
>===================================================================
>RCS file: /cvsroot/gnugo/gnugo/regression/strategy.tst,v
>retrieving revision 1.10
>diff -r1.10 strategy.tst
>52a53,61
>> 
>> #CATEGORY=BAD_PROBLEM
>> #DESCRIPTION=Not clear enough.
>> #SEVERITY=0
>> # From STRATEGY:
>> #    2.7.178 makes the move at P17 which is better than the game
>> #    move at P18 but probably inferior to the recommended move at P15.
>> #    It is not totally clear to me that the move at P15 is really
>> #    best since the 3-3 point is still open. 
>75a85,91
>> #CATEGORY=BAD_PROBLEM
>> #DESCRIPTION=Problem not clear enough.
>> #SEVERITY=0
>> #From STRATEGY:
>> #     It is unclear that the recommended E9 is the best move. 
>> #     W cannot cut at E11, or even threaten to cut and keep sente. 
>> #     GNU Go 2.7.205 plays at G10 which is a good move.
>86a103,111
>> 
>> #CATEGORY=PATTERN_TUNING
>> #DESCRIPTION=N11 may not be biggest, but should be found.
>> #SEVERITY=2
>> #    2.7.179: This can surely be fixed with the addition of a
>> #    pattern. After N11, the strings at M12 and N10 cannot both be 
>> #    saved. This is not necessarily the biggest move on the board but 
>> #    at least this move should be found.
>> #
>91a117,121
>> 
>> #CATEGORY=DYNAMIC_READING
>> #DESCRIPTION=Atari is certainly better.
>> #SEVERITY=4
>> #PREDICESSOR=reading.tst#124
>102a133,137
>> 
>> #CATEGORY=OWL_TUNING
>> #DESCRIPTION=S13 is terrible - negative value.
>> #SEVERITY=8
>> #    2.7.179: Owl code finds Q11 but it remains undervalued at 17 points.
>139a175,185
>> 
>> #CATEGORY=PATTERN_TUNING
>> #DESCRIPTION=Blocking in the corner is better.
>> #SEVERITY=3
>> #    This test passed before 2.7.183, but for the wrong reason: 
>> #    the move at C3 was allegedly an owl attack/defense point for 
>> #    the dragon at D3, which of course it is not.
>> #
>> #    Thus this example should be regarded as having been already
>> #    broken.
>> #
>193a240,247
>> 
>> #CATEGORY=STRATEGY
>> #DESCRIPTION=L14 is not a terrible way to attack O13 group.
>> #SEVERITY=2
>> #Consider retiring this problem, or adding L14.  L14 is not terrible.
>> #M11 is better than L4
>> #    2.7.231: Broke again. M11 is overrated at 28 points. The
>> #    large followup value is responsible.
>197a252,265
>> 
>> #CATEGORY=STRATEGY
>> #DESCRIPTION=N16 is better than M11.  Could be a tough attack, though.
>> #SEVERITY=4
>> #    2.7.179: After fixing strategy 40, the spurious defenses of D19
>> #    will be removed. Now N16 will be the most valuable move. So 
>> #    this should be fixed automatically when 40 is fixed.
>> #
>> #    2.7.180: this test passes.
>> #
>> #    2.7.220: N12 is found as an owl attack point for the S14 dragon.
>> #    This attack will probably fail. More seriously, M16 is preferred
>> #    to N16.
>> #
>210a279,295
>> #CATEGORY=STRATEGY
>> #DESCRIPTION=L4 is awkward.
>> #SEVERITY=2
>> #    2.7.179: Whether or not the recommended move at G2 is found, the 
>> #    move at A6 is egregiously bad. In this situation an owl critical 
>> #    dragon adjoins an owl dead one. We need to revisit our policy for 
>> #    such situations. The reading code thinks the worm at B4 can be 
>> #    defended, so this is an owl lunch.
>> #
>> #    2.7.180: After revision of semeai.c, the move at A6 is no longer
>> #    found. Now GNU plays at M16 on the top. Arguably stabilizing
>> #    the bottom at G2 or (worse but still OK) at J2 is better but
>> #    I would class this result as ACCEPTABLE.
>> #
>> #    3.1.9: Best move here is tough.  GnuGo correctly tries
>> #    to stabalize G3 group.
>> #
>227a313,315
>> #CATEGORY=FUSEKI_STRATEGY
>> #DESCRIPTION=B17 better than D17
>> #SEVERITY=3
>236a325,328
>> 
>> #CATEGORY=OWL_TUNING
>> #DESCRIPTION=P9 is pointless compared to Q9.
>> #SEVERITY=8
>238a331
>> # So much better, that I removed Q11 option -trevor
>241c334
>< #? [Q9|Q11]*
>---
>> #? [Q9]*
>Index: STRATEGY
>===================================================================
>RCS file: /cvsroot/gnugo/gnugo/regression/STRATEGY,v
>retrieving revision 1.3
>diff -r1.3 STRATEGY
>0a1,8
>> THIS FILE CAN BE CONSIDERRED OBSOLETE
>> 
>> 3.1.9:  Moved all comments from here to strategy.tst
>> 
>> Comments on strategy2.tst still pending.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>gnugo-devel mailing list
>address@hidden
>http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnugo-devel
>