Re: [gnugo-devel] GNU Go 3.1.32 - VC inconsistencies

[Arend Bayer]

On Mon, 15 Apr 2002, Gunnar Farneback wrote:

> Trevor wrote:
> > ./regress.sh . trevora.tst
> > 140 unexpected FAIL: Correct 'G4', got 'D4'
> > ./regress.sh . lazarus.tst
> > 6 unexpected FAIL: Correct 'H3', got 'H2'
> > ./regress.sh . nngs.tst
> > 770 unexpected FAIL: Correct '!K2', got 'K2'
> > ./regress.sh . trevorc.tst
> > 350 unexpected FAIL: Correct 'E3', got 'J4'
> > ./regress.sh . global.tst
> > 14 unexpected FAIL: Correct 'S9', got 'E1'

> Do this for both platforms and save the debug output to files. Compare
> them to see where they differ. The most likely result (my guess) is
> that some owl_attack or owl_defend trace differs. In that case, run

I think your guess is right here if the behaviour is still the same as the
one listed on http://www.public32.com/regress/?trevora:140
and the dragon in question is C4, so the command line used should be:

gnugo --quiet -a -w -t -d0xa -l games/trevor/auto/a005.sgf -L 12 
--decide-dragon C4 -o vars.sgf

As these are only 100-200 variations, this looks analyzable. If someone has
only access to VC, he could also e-mail me the output + vars.sgf and I will
have a look at it. (Of course, Trevor, if you have time to do that, you
could put up the results somewhere on www.public32.com - that would be great.)

Arend