Yes, I'm exaggerating - but I do remember that when the idea came up, quite a bit of emotional reaction against it. Of course I realize that there have always been a few who believed some type of global search would be needed.
- Don On Mon, 2007-04-09 at 23:53 -0500, Matt Gokey wrote: > > In my opinion, the insight that Chrilly articulated was that all of > > sudden we are now all using some type of global search - the very > > idea was considered blasphemy just 2 or 3 years ago. > That may be too strong a statement. It may have not been popular but > many people consistently believed global search must be a big part of > any strong playing program, myself included. Not searching using the > same techniques as used for chess, but IMO certainly searching has not > ever been altogether dismissed nor considered blasphemy. Look back at > posts around 10 years ago (when I first joined the list) and probably > since its inception and you'll find this to be true. I personally > wrote > about it on several occasions suggesting that to counter the > evaluation > problem the search needed to go very deep and even talked about > "sampling" the tree. Other probability based searches have been > studied > and written about in academic papers and on this list as well. The > crucial combination of techniques didn't bubble up, but not for lack > of trying. > _______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
