On Mon, 2008-09-29 at 17:14 -0400, Álvaro Begué wrote: > On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 5:11 PM, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > You are right, I didn't notice that. > > > > I am doing the 8 transformations of move SEQUENCES, which is not quite > > the same as transforming and adjusting the positions themselves which > > would be a more powerful way to do this. > > > > Doing sequences was easier with a quick and dirty script. > > > > Of course this should not change the conclusion. > > In practice, it shouldn't, but doing it on move sequences is safer. > Doing it from positions could in theory result in problems with the > application of the super-ko rule. It would certainly get you in > trouble if you were analyzing 2x2 go.
An interesting hybrid approach that is also safe in the sense you are talking about is to match positions but only if the canonical boards up to this point matched. In other words the canonical position must match and also the canonical history. This is almost, but not quite the best of both worlds (it doesn't pick up transpositions.) The hybrid approach would have at least picked up the position that Matthew noticed. - Don > > Álvaro. > _______________________________________________ > computer-go mailing list > computer-go@computer-go.org > http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
