dear Robert, >> It will never be known since there's not enough space in the known >> universe to write it down. We're talking about a number with over >> 10^100 digits. > > How do you know that an implicit expression (of length smaller than 10^80) > of the number does not exist? :)
Of course an implicit one exists. One can write a program to compute it, and declare that's the number, in a highly compressed form:-) >> It is reasonable to expect the perfect komi does not depend on games >> of more than 361 moves. > > I do not think we may make such a premature claim. I didn't say I'm sure; I only said it's reasonable, as in I would bet evenly on it. Presumably ou think chances are better than even that it doesn't depend on games of more than 450 moves, and worse than even that it only depends on games of at most 300 moves. What is your best estimate of point where where chances are even? >> Even with some ko fights, the ko recaptures >> are likely bounded by the number of unplayed points. > > From experience as go players, yes. But... I have seen too many surprising > sequences and sacrifices to be sure. > >> Then we estimate the decision complexity to be upper bounded by >> 200^181 and the game tree complexity by 200^361. > > I won't believe such until proven:) This is not about proving. This is about what numbers the press could use that are not too arbitrary. regards, -John _______________________________________________ Computer-go mailing list Computer-go@computer-go.org http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
