gnugo-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [gnugo-devel] regarding paul_3_13.8a


From: Arend Bayer
Subject: Re: [gnugo-devel] regarding paul_3_13.8a
Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 16:52:13 +0100 (MET)



Paul wrote:

> i just meant it could be buggy in the same way paul_3_13.8a _might_
> have been. however, my investigations show neigther of them was
> (almost for sure).
> 
> here is some debug output (with paul_3_14.1 and paul_3_13.8b
> reverted):
> 
> D305 matched at C18:
>    A B C D E F G H J K L M N O P Q R S T
> 19 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
> 18 . . . . O . . . X . . . . . . . . . . 18
> 17 . . X . . . X . . . X . O . . O . . . 17
> 16 . X . X O . . . . + . . . . . + . . . 16
> 15 . . X O . X . . . . . . . . . . O . . 15
> 14 . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
> 13 . . . . . . . . . . O . . . . . . O . 13
> 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . 12
> 11 . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . X O . . 11     WHITE has captured 0 stones
> 10 . . . + . . . . . + . . . . . + . X . 10     BLACK has captured 1 stones
>  9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . 9
>  8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O X . O . 8
>  7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O X O . . 7
>  6 . . X . . . . . . . . . . . O . X O . 6
>  5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . O X . . 5
>  4 . . . + O . . . . + . . O . X X . O . 4
>  3 . . X . . . X . X . O . O X . . O . . 3
>  2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
>  1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
>    A B C D E F G H J K L M N O P Q R S T
> Goal at C16
> 
> this is just what nando wrote. the pattern is matched against "goal"
> at C16. note that E18 is not listed in the goal array. this "match"
> is very stupid.

This is exactly one of the positions I remember, so I am pretty sure
you've identified the problem. (I.e. I don't think we need to back your
patches out.)

> this doesn't uncover the real reason of failures in global.tst since
> mismatched D305 was far away from Q6 point and could barely affect
> move valuation. however, i think it must be just another pattern that
> was matched against empty goal, just as D305. if Arend shows the way
> he discovered that D305 wasn't matched in several cases, i'll be
> able to check it.

Sorry, should have mentioned it was on the attack on the white dragon
in the upper-left.

Once you know this (which you can find out of course with gnugo -t -w),
there are two quick ways to identify the responsible owl changes:

1. Quick and dirty:
gnugo --decide-owl C16 -t 2>x
gnugo-patched --decide-owl C16 -t 2>xx
diff -u x xx >diff
Usually the first changed line already shows the problem.

2. Still quick and more correct:
gnugo --decide-owl C16 -o x.sgf
gnugo-patched --decide-owl C16 -o xx.sgf

Now load the two .sgf-files. As the two files will have a different opinion
on one of the owl results, you can just let them play against each other
(i.e. if one attack claims WIN, the other loss, let the one who claims WIN
choose the move, then for the following defense move the consult the other
.sgf file), and you very quickly find the position deep in the .sgf-tree
which really caused the difference.

Arend




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]