Le 24/10/2017 à 22:41, Robert Jasiek a écrit : > On 24.10.2017 20:19, Xavier Combelle wrote: >> totally unrelated > > No, because a) software must also be evaluated and can by go theory and What do you want evaluate the software for ? corner cases which never have happen in a real game ?
The current testing way that deepmind used that is: first of all making software and software-human tournament, guess pro move, guess pro game result was amply enough to make the best go software. > b) software can be built on exact go theory. That currently (b) is > unpopular does not mean unrelated. > It is just a wild guess. exact go theory is full of hole. Actually, to my knowledge human can't apply only the exact go theory and play a decent game. If human can't do that, how it will teach a computer to do it magically ? if you want we can setup a game were you apply only exact go theory against me (I'm only 2 kyu) The rules are the following, you have to apply mechanically the go theory as a computer would do at each move such as I could do exactly the same and show in a detailed way how you applied it. If you won I will recognize the fact that the exact go theory is not full of hole. The reason why (b) had became unpopular is because there is no go theory precise enough to implement it as an algorithm and MCTS and neural network was way to use small or none part of go theory and make a decent player. _______________________________________________ Computer-go mailing list Computer-go@computer-go.org http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
