Hi Don, On 12/22/06, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It's easy to adapt monte carlo programs to have the goal of trying to win as much space or territory as possible but many of us have studied this as see that it seriously weakens monte carlo programs.
My (jokingly serious) point was that if you succeed solving the "normal" game of Go, fixing it for this additional constraing should be trivial (i.e. possibly only some 6 to 8 orders of magnitude simpler)
But this is not the real problem. It seems that the handicap system is not reasonable in general for computers. [...] It seems that playing the best move possible (best in the sense of maximizing your territory gain) is not the best strategy when playing a handicap game. You literally have to play foolishly in order to dupe your opponent into losing.
I would beg to partially disagree. The above is true if giving handicap to a player of equal strength, or at least stronger than the handicap would be fair for. IMHO if I give handicap it is because the other player is weaker, so I don't *have* to play foolishly - he will make mistakes that I can see and exploit. If I still can't win, it means the handicap should be lowered... This is the strategy that one uses even in even games, right? One plays what one thinks is best given the position, and if the opponent's reply is less than optimal one tries to punish it (with various degrees of success, but that's another issue :-)) Best regards, Vlad _______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
