[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [gnugo-devel] scoring bug?

From: Terry McIntyre
Subject: Re: [gnugo-devel] scoring bug?
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 13:49:04 -0800

glGo does expect users to mark the dead stones. I'm not sure that this
question is related to gnugo at all. It is possible to configure glGo to use gnugo ( as I have on my computer ), but the scoring system appears to be part of glGo, not of the go-playing engine.

I just created a file using glGo playing against Gnugo, and the first few lines follow:


PW[GNU Go]PB[Black]DT[2005-11-16]

--- so I think Todd is using glGo to play some other engine, but the scoring problem is not part of the engine, but of the way glGo works - one must explicitly mark the dead stones. glGo shows the change, and counts the remaining da-me - when glGo's count of da-me agrees with yours, the score will be accurate.

Terry McIntyre

On Nov 16, 2005, at 12:37 PM, Gunnar Farnebäck wrote:

Todd Sprang wrote:
if you examine this game, by the typical rules i've seen everywhere
else, the score would be black 23:white 21 (one black stone captured
during play). the 4 black stones in the white territory are considered
dead as they stand and are added to white's territory score of 16.

Yes, black wins by 2.

instead, gnugo scores the game 23:2 since only one white territory is
entirely surrounded by white. it really should figure that white's
effectively captured the black stones on its side.

GNU Go has no difficulty scoring this correctly, e.g.:

Sulitelma 411% gnugo -l scoring.sgf --score finish
49 white (O) move PASS
50 black (X) move PASS
Black wins by 2.0 points

In fact I'm rather curious under what circumstances it could fail.

PW[Human]PB[Igo for windows]

Uh, isn't "Igo for windows" the 9x9 free download version of Many
Faces? Assuming that this is just a mistake, could it be that glGo is
scoring the game without consulting GNU Go (and maybe is expecting the
user to mark dead stones)?


gnugo-devel mailing list

reply via email to

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