Re: computer-go: RE: beat 9d before 2010 - no, size does matter

["Gary Boos" <gboos@xxxxxxx>]

I'm afraid you're wrong on #2.  At least 2 years of effort by a team of
pros was put forth
on the overhauled Golaith (lead by Mark Boone) and the program
never got to playing form ( the effort financially collapsed).

I'll guess at 3-5 good programmers (at least 1 being dan level)
for 5 years before it gets to even 1 dan.  That's my opinion
anyway.
        Gary

BTW the pieces of code is still exist.

-----Original Message-----
From: Patricia Hughes and David Elsdon <babel17@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Monday, November 15, 1999 3:32 PM
Subject: computer-go: RE: beat 9d before 2010 - no, size does matter


>Ray Tayek wrote:
>
>> > > >I think it's impossible for a computer to beat a pro 9d
>> >...
>> >Without a technology breakthrough (in computer), is difficult to say a
>> >computer can beat a pro in 10 years. ...
>>
>> its actually real easy to say (the answer is no, even with *many* major
>> technology breakthroughs).
>>
>> a little arithmetic will make it clear.
>>
>> 361!  (approximate number of games=1.4*10^768)
>> 3^361 (approximate number of board states=1.7*10^172).
>>
>> the first of these is a *real* big number. there are probably more go
games
>> than there are atoms in the universe.
>>
>> you can solve the endgame and you might make a book for the fuseki, but
the
>> middle game is way too complicated.
>>
>> i doubt if a machine will beat any pro, let alone a 9-dan (have you ever
>> played a 9-dan?) in 20 years, let alone 10.
>
>BUT I am saying that we can build a Go playing program that does not come
up
>against these BIG numbers at all. I am saying that we can capture the
knowledge
>that a 9 Dan Professional has in his head. Then our program will be a 9 Dan
>Professional. The program will beat the professional because the program
will
>not get tired, misread a sequence, forget to take something into account or
>have an off day etc.
>
>The BIG numbers that concern me are things like:
>
>1. How much knowledge do I need to represent.
>2. How long will it take to elicit and structure.
>3. How powerful is the human brain compared to my PC.
>
>AND I think the answers are - VERY approximately:
>
>1. Not more than 100,000 rules
>2. About 5 years of full time effort for a team of two + good access to a 9
Dan
>Professional
>3. About the same to within an order of magnitude.
>
>Cheers
>
>David Elsdon
>
>
>
>