Re: [Fwd: Re: Strong players only?]

[Mousheng Xu <xu@xxxxxxxxxx>]

John Clarke wrote:

> Hi
>
> > Computer go is definitely not like computer chess because we do know very well
> > that brute force will *never* be an issue in computer go : a good go programm
>
> But what is the human brain if not the archetypical "brute force" machine?
> Neurons aren't very smart - there are just lots of them.
>
> Almost certainly humans use a massively parallel search to choose their moves.
>
> Of course we both agree that humans only evaluate high depth trees to *check*
> possible plays, and even those trees are severely pruned.
>
> But the basic algorithm is surely just a very big, very parallel search.  And
> the more search the better.
>
> > we have to know how human are so
> > good at pattern recognition, image recognition, etc..
>
> Massive, massive parallel processing.  The human visual system is equivalent
> to something in the range 1e4 - 1e5 400MHz Pentiums all working together.
>
> Remember our best estimate is that Kasparov embodied between 2 - 10 times
> as many chess mips as Deep Blue. ( I estimated that myself, and then was
> intrigued --- and very pleased --- to see that Hans Moravec agreed:
>
>  http://frc.ri.cmu.edu/~hpm/hpm.pubs.html
>
> )
>
> Go programming isn't magic, and the solution, when it comes, will involve
> *lots* of computation and probably disappointingly little cleverness.
> Some cleverness of course, but just enough, and not lots.
>
> ObStrongPlayer:  I guess I expect that a world champion program will be
> written by strong programmers, with the added hack of strong go experts
> for fine tuning.
>
> Regards
> John
> johnc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> PS.  Sorry for the hectoring tone:  I'm an engineer and consequently a
> great fan of brute force since it works so well.