2009/4/23 terry mcintyre <terrymcint...@yahoo.com>: > Programs which get semeai and seki right every time might be a few stones > stronger. They'd certainly be more valuable as teaching tools. In the game > above, a stronger program would have exploited my earlier weakness; this > would have encouraged me to make better moves. > _______________________________________________ > computer-go mailing list > computer-go@computer-go.org > http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Actually not. It seems so to a human who every now and then avoids loss by being better at these. But close semeais are rare. Sekis are rarer and program do not fail on theses every time. Go is a game where you can excel by making steady progress throughout the game without any brilliant moves. Also it is quite okay to compensate with other skill, I just played Mogo in KGS and got slaughtered after a careless cut. Well Killing and almost killing a group is where MC programs excel (relative to their strength) and those situations occur in almost every game.. I think semeai problem is easier to solve with: - Preanalysis by a "classical" go-algorithm. To my understanding this is what MFOG does - When we have even more CPU we can have even heavier playouts. Still an open issue whether smarter playout or more playouts is way to go. Although as I remember there were some mailing were it was mentioned cases where a smart playout could even hurt. -- Petri Pitkänen e-mail: petri.t.pitka...@gmail.com _______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
