a few subtleties -- it's possible for a machine to play a perfect endgame, and my guess is that machines will play perfect endgames before people do, although most pros are excellent at the endgame.
counting ko threats and utilizing kos effectively is tricky in playouts -- kos can naturally extend a playout very, very far beyond where the actual advantage would be taken in a non-ko situation, and the likelihood of getting this far often enough in playouts to see the advantage is going to be difficult for machines without a lot of domain-specific knowledge. different humans are often good at different stages of the game, and making up a few points in the endgame, or getting a massive lead in the beginning of the game may be possible, convincing a computer player of something that isn't true -- either that it's nearly guaranteed to win, or nearly guaranteed to lose. all that having been said, i'm quite impressed with how well these programs are doing. s. _______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
