I think finding the line between “legal” and “legal except suicidal” is difficult.
Example from a random game, if we consider the blue area on the right:
There are plenty of legal sequences that lead to that territory becoming Black’s, but IMO the only scenario where that happens is if white loses desire to live and commits suicide.
Again - if that can’t be done, I simply wouldn’t allow engine judgements.
Defending against nonsense is part of the game; as much as it’s annoying, it’s defensible when newbies are playing.
Stalling by self-atari moves is reportable. A mod will end the game if that is happening.
Are we still talking about full beginners?
I have some compassion when this happens. One cannot be guilty when understanding almost nothing, and still have a try to win or to feel deeper how lost he is.
Then i will try myself to communicate, won’t call a mod for that, sorry.
Same here. Nothing wrong with calling a mod if one prefers, though; they’re not going to ban someone for being new to the game.
Groin, I agree with you fully. I would never call a moderator because of the ignorance of a beginner. That might make them give up go completely instead of want to learn it better.
Computers can help us get things done. So we should use them. In the case of beginners who do not understand how a game ends, we should have OGS help explain this to them. This helps both players.
The purpose of calling a mod is (1) to decide the game, and (2) kindly to instruct the beginner on game ethics and site rules. The mods are not truncheon-bearing secret police.
Sure, but you know you are crawling in a cloud, asking yourself what are you doing here playing an obscure game, and suddenly, even with a big smile, a moderator come to check what is happening… Not to say they are doing a bad job ofc. I admire our mods team.
I think the discussion is getting mixed into multiple topics, but my two cents:
I agree with @stone_defender general principles for the SE:
- it should provide mechanical counting to eliminate manual tabulation
- it should provide an intuitive visualization so we understand how the result comes about
- it should not leave vast swaths of neutral territory
- it should not apply Go AI which could give hints as to life/death
- Easiest way to accomplish the above is make users mark any and all dead stones (with obvious instructions), the algorithm either recomputes or continues from there
- (my opinion) it should account for the rules set when tabulating
- To @GreenAsJade point regarding “placing a few stones” in the current SE; I find that in the mid game it can take a lot (20+) stones to close off territory, which is very tedious
Regarding @david265 AI resignation suggestion… I’m not a fan myself. Any level of AI that can handle the ladder examples given above will likely give away knowledge of life/death of groups that DDKs might not see. Also unpopular opinion, but I think ‘useless’ end game invasions are not always useless at DDK levels. Obviously there is trolling potential, but what might be obviously futile to stronger players and AI may not be obvious at DDK, and DDKs must also learn how to kill an invasion. I’ve certainly seen invasions the should not work, survive, and that’s a valid victory for the attacker.
You typically don’t have to place more than a few to persuade it to fill the way you picture.
yes, but looks like there still should be limit of distance of influence of stone
on AI estimation its w+42,5
without limit, its b+8,5 on influence estimator
with (max diameter=11) , it shows correct winner w+1,5
it doesn’t makes much sense to paint entire territory as black when there is so huge distance between black stones
Soo @stone_defender when you putting your estimator on OGS? Manhattan score would crush the current estimate on boards like this
on AI estimator its w+0.7
on “flood in all directions simultaneously” estimator its b+52,5
it fails because high stones grow faster each iteration than stones that are close to corners
stones that are close to corners grow slower because it grows in 2 directions only, while stones in center grows in 4 directions
How to fix it?
the law of conservation of mass is needed
only 1 point should be painted each iteration
black, white, black, white, …
(it paints same shape as in pure flood estimator, just slower and few asymmetry is possible)
much closer to actual score
and with simulation like above, if we just unpaint points one by one that are surrounded(and count these unpainted points), then we will get correct Japanese rules score.
You may be approaching the Bouzy map algorithm, which is a kind of influence/territory estimator.
It looks nice, but I don’t think one can generate reasonable score estimations from fairly simple algorithms like that, nor should OGS players expect that this early in the game.
And if you somehow succeed to make it as accurate as 5k level positional judgement, nobody would be allowed to use it in their games, because it would amount to outside assistence.
it basically answers question “how game will look like if it continues peacefully, without any dead stones and invasions?”
while AI estimators predict crazy AI fight
my estimator is almost pure geometry, no Go knowledge
It’s an interesting balance (dare I say paradox)… you want to make a good score estimator, otherwise what’s the point? But you also don’t want to make a good estimator because then it’s just the computer playing, and then what’s the point
But memes aside, I think people kind of know what they want, a tool to help them count when they’re feeling lazy, just a rough guide to if they’re winning losing, or if they were considering resigning just something to help decide although it might be wrong.
More or less only counting something surrounded or from their stones to the edge of the board more or less, probably ignoring the centre.
Then some people might want a completely manual system, draw border marks stones dead automatically, and some people will just always turn off the estimator anyway.
I guess it’s just not clear how to make a bad estimator that people don’t hate using, just like I imagine that it’s hard to make a bad go ai, that people enjoy playing against.
we always can just stop on this version:
and add ability to easily repaint what it draws
then it will be faster than drawing from zero, while surely no assistance
(it counts all stones as alive until you choose which are dead. May be crazy in beginning, but quality is good in endgame)