Did you ever have a game Iike this? I think there are too many theorists worrying about things don’t happen
The solution is though to have an option to disable auto score, everything back to a hundred years ago 
I haven’t played a whole lot of live games since the update.
I don’t think very many of my correspondence games have ended or ended in scoring since the update either.
Just because it hasn’t happened to you or me doesn’t mean it’s just something in theory. It has clearly come up as a potential issue. It’s also the case that without a potential policy on it, people might start doing it more often than now (which maybe not at all, or it may be not reported on the forums, or just not reported).
3 Likes
Sure, too many too serious on the tool and features of the site, 
Under what conditions is it acceptable to restart?
It’s difficult. This is just a general issue when both players think the game is finished, while in fact it isn’t.
Just the other day there was a more obvious case posted on reddit.
I think there is no easy way to fix such player mistakes so that it would be considered fair to everyone in 100% of the cases. In real life games, sometimes I might encourage players to play on, but that is already interfering with the game and it will be difficult to automate. And players could even refuse (after all, they both passed, so the game is technically over).
Perhaps the fairest way would be to always use KataGo to automatically evaluate the score when both players pass and never allow resumption. The players wouldn’t even need to accept the score before the result is final. It’s all automatic when both players pass (similar to FlyOrDie).
The players might be surprised by the score, but at least it’s virtually impossible to “cheat”.
You’d have to give KataGo sufficient playouts to score the game correctly in 99.999% of cases.
3 Likes
In a real life tournament game, my opponent counted 10 more points for himself, I did not bother to watch and a 2d spectator saw and corrected it. I never thought my opponent was cheating.
No need to complicate things. There are most likely practical and easy ways to solve complicated problem. People don’t want to do that any more, like where is my calculator?
Go is an intellectual game. When there is a problem, solve it yourself. I thought that’s why people like Go, apparently not. Sad
Well, the other option is to always require players to mark dead stones (like KGS) and resume when there is disagreement. After all, that is how it’s usually done in real life. That would be fine too.
But I think OGS wants to accomodate players (novices) who don’t understand this dead stone removal phase and help them to score the game. In that case, I feel OGS should fully automate scoring and result determination, instead of some in-between solution.
5 Likes
If you look at the image/game in the OP though, Katago might give a fairly random looking score to the game though, depending on how far it can get into the opponents territory, or how many stones would be captured etc.
It’s not really a good solution to positions with weaknesses that the players haven’t seen.
I think definitely one should just want to let the two players accept whichever score they both agree even if it’s nonsense from perfect play or superhuman play with Katago + high playouts.
The problem is just to help that process along enough but without giving away the opinion of a superhuman bot 
Taking katago out of the scoring would obviously solve the problem, but I think the nicety of an engine like Katago is that is likely to “understand” more easily sekis and things in the scoring.
3 Likes
So what would be a good solution in the OP case? The scoring tool may note that both players missed that the game was not over, but still it would need to assign a status of all those stones to give a score. Which player should get the advantage in this case?
Imagine players passing at the start of the game - Katago might explode! 
On a serious note, during the scoring phase in my opinion Katago should run two times - once with Black to move and once with White to move. If it turns out that the score is (significantly) different depending on whose move it is, then it should not show which stones are alive etc., and the game is somehow resumed or declared a tie.
6 Likes
Even without showing the status of stones, a forced resumption would be a hint already, so I feel that is already interfering with the game.
If the bandwidth of possible scores (with black vs white to play) crosses the win/loss boundary, perhaps declaring a tie may be the fairest result. But I think OGS doesn’t fully support ties, so automatic game annulment might be the closest approximation to that result.
4 Likes
Calling a game a tie, that two players agree is over and would agree who would’ve won without outside knowledge doesn’t seem like a fair result, it just seems like meddling.
I already tried to link to some suggestions above.
The problem is it’s not clear the suggestions perform better than the current method, although maybe Vsotveps will in for a lot of cases, unless someone else wants to think of some counterexamples to his algorithms scoring (I tried already).
In any case it probably has to be @anoek that tries out any of these scoring tweaks. Do you, anoek, have any opinion on the OP’s game, about how katago hints at there being some aji that one player could possibly exploit by resuming?
You just should never pass too early. If opponent will be able to use Kata Scoring to beat you after this, its your problem that you passed.
2 Likes
We could also just link to KGS or Fox or Tygem etc in the scoring phase, because I imagine people will want to just play somewhere else if the accepted behaviour is that you can use Katago to influence the end of the game.
1 Like
Currently, I don’t know. Stalling the game by repeatedly restarting has always been a problem among DDKs who don’t know better and SDKs who are cheats (one guy restarted a game over 100 times against a foe who refused to give in to his cheating). I think I favor prohibiting a restart because it would solve that problem as well as the issue at hand. Like the current practice in bot games, let the game be scored and that’s it. Unsettled parts of the board would be left unscored. Perhaps institute a grace period, as I described above, to handle rare cases where the autoscore made a mistake.
2 Likes
I see territory that belongs to no one. How it distinguishes between seki and random nonsense?
Maybe make it so that random nonsense always belongs to someone? Then you will not be able to trust Kata Scoring and will have to recheck score yourself before accept score.
1 Like
I’m against. Its part of Go logic that your territory is what you believe it is. If your opponent thinks that your group is dead, let him proof it.
Just make it so that its not clear which group is unsettled by Kata opinion. And let opponents change status of groups.
2 Likes
I follow @gennan’s idea that OGS is about beginner-friendlyness. The scoring phase is difficult to operate.
With this in mind, automatic scoring is preferable to putting the responsibility on the players.
I really like your suggestion to look at both player’s next moves. Let me extend it to a “quite fair system”:
- After both players pass, the winner is determined by KataGo by looking at the position both with black to play and white to play.
- If the winner and the score is the same, the game ends. Dead stones are determined by AI.
- If the winner is the same, but the score is different, the AI plays out the game to the end and then scores it as in 2.
- If the winner is different, the game is on the edge. But since both players passed, the winner has failed to see the possible upset. The result is therefore a tie.
3 Likes
OGS should go by the rules of the chosen rulesets, instead of inventing something. If it is too much to auto, let the mod decide. Being friendly is good, but if there is an official rule, we should be taught to follow that.
If restart is not allowed by the rule in real life, it’s just a nice feature for us to make some moves to let the scoring work correctly. If an agreement is reached, fine, let them play. Otherwise, one can refuse to play, pause the game and let the mod rule by the book.
1 Like