I'd like to know how well MoGo would have played if you let it think
for a week for every move.
Probably diminishing returns. Once a series of random playouts has
given it a selection of the more significant points to consider, I'd
expect move-order, forcing moves, the need to follow a sequence to a
stable conclusion to become so critical that any number of pure-random
playouts would fall short of giving a proper evaluation of a position.
--------
Another matter:
I'm very fond of C, because my love-hate relation with computers goes
back to the days when it was essential to know where your program was
and what it was up to; I'm still happier with systems where I know
they're doing pretty much what I asked for.
But for go I think I'll need a complex design with multiply-linked
lists, which I can do in C, but not without my mind turning to
sphagetti-knots for the duration.
So Scheme is one of the languages I've been considering, and in the
process I stumbled upon a list of programs it was used to write. One
of them: GIMP (Graphic Images Manipulation Program).
Relevance?--Graphic images of any detail are enormous chunks of data;
doing even a simple computation on one of these files has got to
require a lot of bit-crunching, which used to be pretty time-consuming
even when I was processing low-resolution grayscale photos for a
monthly tabloid. I haven't run a direct comparison with GIMP's
commercial rivals, but it's impressively fast by my standards...
Forrest Curo
----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
