Hi Sébastian,

Welcome to the Abalone world :)

>Engines
Aba-pro is a powerful engine, I think Tino has done a very impressive work. I
took me ages to beat this engine with MLA. I'm sure abapro is faster in node
evaluation than MLA.

> I am able to reach higher search depths than current Abalone progs (10
> ply I was told in case of Aba-Pro).
Exploring the game, and paticulary the tree cutting issues, legal moves
generation, position evaluation will lead you to the max depth you'll be able
to reach lol (for example, ProbCut doesnt seem to work and Aba-pro's heuristic
has been proven wrong in its expansion strategy by MLA is some cases, other
example : bitboards seem to lead nowhere).

> field, pursued without the required professional approach.
Lol, do not underestimate Peer, Tino and others :) Particularly their knowledge
of game programming (for both search and evaluation lol).

> I also want to provide a GUI that'll include a lot more powerful tools
> for analysis and game/database management.
There is a game file format in MLA, and some tools (like a Macromedia Flash game
player for your web pages), feel free to contact me for further info. It's the
same concerning API/engine communication, Peer is also using the AbNet
protocol.

> What i noted most about Abalone (in contrast to chess) is the lack of
> information even regarding such simple things as rules/notation.
Rules and notation are around, MLA allows both notations. To me, theoretical
knowledge of the game is an important issue. From the opening book automatic
generation work i've done so far (no yet embedded in my engine) this is a
tricky issue. But knowledge generation still looks possible to me.

Note that my MLA work is in standby for the time being, these days, i'm more
focused on my girlfriend, my job and vacations (i'm back from mexico today and
will run to kenya in july).

Good luck, build competition to Nacre, Abapro and MLA :) Feel free to share your
ideas, ask for any info / litterature that could help you.

Promise : If you beat MLA i'll put my hands in the engine again lol. 2.5 is the
current version, if you beat it. 1.8 is the one to beat, it's the won that won
against abapro.

David.







Selon icyclemort <Sebastian.Mort@...>:

> Hello all!
>
>
> A quick introduction:
>
> I am new to the field of Abalone programming.
>
> Nevertheless, my goal is clear, I want to create an Abalone engine
> superior to Aba-Pro (mid-term) and possibly (hard to judge how
> difficult it is) make it equal or even superior to the cream of human
> players(long term).
>
> I also want to provide a GUI that'll include a lot more powerful tools
> for analysis and game/database management.
>
> To be honest, Abalone programming as of now seems to be a rather loose
> field, pursued without the required professional approach.
> I've got a lot of chess programming experience, and I am very
> confident that I'll be able to deliver a GUI/engine package that is
> superior to what is currently available.
>
> I am able to reach higher search depths than current Abalone progs (10
> ply I was told in case of Aba-Pro).
>
> Positionally, I've got a lof of ideas that I'll try and see if they
> work as well as I hope to.
>
> So, now you're informed about my lofty goals. ;
>
>
> --- GUI/engine/interface ---
>
>
> My engine is now up and running fine, although it is still lacking a
> lot of basic search algorithm enhancements and Abalone knowledge, but
> both will come...
>
> I am still working on the GUI, it'll include a lot more stuff than
> current Ablone GUI's. It'll include a lot of stuff that should be
> interesting for Abalone players and programmers alike. Analysis Modes,
> game/database management, engine matches/tournaments, patzer/reduced
> strength computer modes and a lot of interesting stuff that has not
> yet made into a single abalone GUI (think chess and chessbase).
>
> Engine and GUI are seperated programs and communicate through an
> interface that is shamelessly based upon the Universal Chess Interface
> (UCI). I'll publish the sepecification along with the GUI, so if
> anybody is interested they can then program only an engine and rely
> upon an existing and powerful GUI. That will also help to make better
> comparisons between engines (automatic and easy to organize engine
> matches and tournaments). It should increase the competitve side of
> Abalone programming and hopefully fuel the field with more enthusiasm
> and creativity...
>
>
> --- questions ---
>
> What i noted most about Abalone (in contrast to chess) is the lack of
> information even regarding such simple things as rules/notation.
>
> I am currently a bit baffled by Abalone notation and some rules, and
> I'd like to clarify those before I move on.
>
> --- rules ---
>
> Rules about movement and win conditions are simple and clear. Perfect.
>
>
> But I am not so sure about repetition rules. Is the repetition of a
> position allowed to happen or is there some rule forbidding it or
> deciding in favor of a draw/or one of the players?
> If there is no such rule, how are infinite repetitions (nobody willing
> to deviate from a position; or even positions where everything but the
> a repetition would wreck one side's position) dealt with??
>
>
> What about the length of a game, is there some kind of established
> maximum number of moves (e.g. without a single lost stone) after which
> a game is aborted in some kind of way?
>
>
> --- notation ---
>
> Regarding the board/fields, I follow the Aba-Pro way of doing it.
> (That is, the interface specification will; the GUI is customizable
> and supports Netablone board noatition)
>
> a1 is bottom/left
> i9 is top/right
>
>
> inline moves and pushes are recorded as following:
>
> a1b2c3>b2c3d4 = a1b2
>
>
> broadside moves are a bit troubling, because very different notations
> seem to be in use:
>
> a1b2c3>b1c2d3
>
> is recorded as:
> (1) = a1c3b1 (makes sense to me)
> (2) = c3a1d3 (the same but other direction)
> (3) = a1c3d3 (less intuitive, IMO)
> (4) = c3a1b1 (same as above the other way round)
>
> (1) and (2) are FromFirst/FromLast/ToFirst
> (3) and (4) are FromFirst/FromLast/ToLast
>
> I am strongly leaning towards (1) and (2) but would like to hear
> recommendations.
>
> Regarding the difference between (1)/(3) and (2)/(4), it is the
> question of from where to start counting the stones.
> I've read suggestions that the first stone should be the one most
> closely to the bottom or the top of the field (both seem to be in use).
>
> Never have I read a suggestion of how to record a move like
> (c3c4c5>d3d4d5) where the issue would have to be decided upon a
> left/right criteria.
>
> Is there a style that is more commonly used?
>
> BTW, I despise an ambigious style. The interface specification will
> certainly not allow more than one way to handle it.
>
> (The GUI will though, there you should and will be able to choose any
> kind of notation you wish to, I might even enable custom-build notations.)
>
> So that is the notation issue, thx for reading my rant.
>
>
> --- Aba-Pro ---
>
> A completely different issue. I have tried to get my hands on Aba-Pro.
> But the website given seems to be dead. I am close to calling the
> faculty in Graz directly.
> Is there currently any way to buy/order Aba-Pro?
>
>
> --- finishing ---
>
>
> So, I hope somebody will answer my questions regarding rules and notation.
> Don't expect GUI/engine to appear before the end of july/august.
>
> Happy abalone programming!
>
>
> BTW, if somebody is interested in the engine/GUI concept and might
> want to program such an engine, I'd advise to contact me by e-mail
> (Sebastian.Leibnitz{a} googlemail . com)
>
>
> Regards, and bye.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>