On 28.10.2017 11:13, Petri Pitkanen wrote:
Exactly verbalized rules lose to pure analysis power.
(I think with "verbalised" you mean "codified in writing", with "pure analysis power" you mean "volume of reading, calculation, sampling or NN processing".)
Rules are not meant to win or lose against "pure analysis power" but to use it when necessary and unavoidable, e.g., tactical reading when clarifying L+D status. A rule can be "Consider an attack if the L+D status is 'unsettled'" but also tactical reading determines that status.
Human intuition is trained with endless repetition.
IMO, intuition does not exist; it is nothing but an excuse for not understanding subconscious or currently unobservable thinking yet. Can we speak of human subconscious thinking, please?
Subconscious thinking can be trained by learning rules, practising problems etc. Conscious, explicit thinking can be trained by learning rules, practising problems etc. So what do you want to say?
-- robert jasiek _______________________________________________ Computer-go mailing list Computer-go@computer-go.org http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
