I have repeatedly stated that the Hahn system is a simplification, but this is just a guess on my part and I might have it backwards. I'm not sure whether that invalidates the idea that computers will play this better or not.
Here is a thought experiment. Imagine an omniscient player or program which is capable of always playing the very best move according to either criteria that you configure. You can configure it maximize the score, or to win the game. In win game mode it will play ANY move randomly that is "good enough." Since it is omnicient there is no point in talking about risk, or chances in any context. In a lost game it would play a move at random. In maximize score mode it would choose the move that maximizes the total points taken on the board. It would be the perfect Hahn system player for instance. The more difficult strategy is to maximize total points on the board. In fact, this is a superset of the other strategy because maximizing the points taken will always be a valid way to implement the "try to win game" strategy, but the reverse is not true. This is no doubt why computers play stronger with the goal to win the game - it is a much less distracting concept for a computer to grasp. So I am not sure, but I might be reversing my point of view on this. I have to think about it some more. It's clear that computers play weaker with this strategy, but I'm still pretty sure they will play the Hahn system better with the maximize points taken strategy but it may not follow that they will play this better relative to humans. Especially if it is a more challenging goal. What I cannot decide is if it is really more challenging - I just know it's more challenging to do it perfectly. - Don On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 11:00 AM, Robert Jasiek <jas...@snafu.de> wrote: > steve uurtamo wrote: > >> the idea that i like about keeping track of number of points won or >> lost by is that not only could you find the winner, but you could find >> how absolutely dominant, on average, they were against their >> opponents. >> > > Under normal Go: no! E.g., some players have the style to let every game be > close. > > -- > robert jasiek > _______________________________________________ > computer-go mailing list > computer-go@computer-go.org > http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ >
_______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
