From: David Doshay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>One point not discussed much in this thread is the consistency issue.
>I think that if Kim were able to play a dozen games against mogo with
>this same handicap he would win the last 6 ... people manage to adapt
>and the computers do not.
>But that much cluster time and Mr Kim time are probably not available.
>Perhaps with all of the interest this match is generating we will be
>able to get more of each (or some other pro) in the future.
Unfortunately, it is not that easy to get a supercomputer. I hope that some
firm chooses to take this on as a challenge, the way IBM and Cray took the game
of Chess. As for the learning problem, now that we know how to generate
high-level plays which match the sophistication of high-level joseki, perhaps
it will be possible for computers to learn from pro-level games, including
those lost by the program to pros. Who's to say that a nice long post-game
analysis by the program could not lead to it returning with better moves?
I should mention one point: Mogo was far enough ahead that Kim estimates an 8
stone handicap would be tough for him to beat; perhaps a 7 stone handicap would
be appropriate. Interesting that Kim, though not familiar with Montecarlo
programs, quickly grasped that the weird-to-humans endgame play, which blithely
ignores the value of playing dame points under Chinese scoring, provided that
it preserves a 0.5 win, does not detract from the true value of Mogo's lead.
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
