> You have to have a nakade pattern on the > board somewhere, the score has to be close and in your favor > considering the nakade, and the program has to believe that it is more > advantageous to give away stones that not.
eh, or it can't see the capture until it's only a few moves away, because its horizon with respect to self-atari is so shallow. deepen the horizon and it'll consider those moves early enough not to screw up its overall win percentage evaluation. > Although it's easy to see that nakade is a problem, I agree with > someone who said it takes a lot of skill to produce this. In fact, I > believe that it cannot be done reliably by any player unless he is > already much stronger than the program, in which case he doesn't "need" > to do it in order to beat the program. I wouldn't go this far -- humans learn from their mistakes, but can stay at the same skill level regardless of how much they learn, either because they forget things that they earlier learned, or because they have very shallow reading, say. for a computer, though, it's quite possible that every single player ranked one or two stones lower than (arbitrary mc program with this weakness -- AMCW) could exploit this weakness in a systematic way, more than 50% of the time. this would eventually reduce AMCW's ranking, of course, but wouldn't raise any of those player's rankings, because their ability to beat one specific player consistently isn't enough to modify their ranking. > (Indeed, it may be a > counterproductive strategy if it distracts you from playing good moves.) these aren't bad moves in any way. they're normal, healthy, strong go-player moves that are recognized instantly by anyone who has a read a copy of "life and death" or similar. > Most MC programs won't just let you pick off points because that is > normally a strategy that decreases your winning chances. They will > only do that if every move leads to the same win or loss in every single > play-out, or if the small win turns out to be easier to manage. or if they aren't reading out the playouts deeply enough that would allow them to correctly consider the impact of those moves early enough to avoid them! > I would love to see a 5kyu player get on KGS and beat mogo in more than > 1 out of 10 games using this specific strategy. My guess is that if > your energy is spent setting up this trick, you will play weaker in general. i dunno. imagine one of the "mate in 20" types of sequences that you're supposed to learn when you first learn chess. imagine that you never learn how to deal with them. s. _______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
