[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: computer-go: Two ways to program a GO-engine
Tom,
This sounds right to me (I don't know if Charles will produce any
references, but they probably exist and I'm too lazy to look them up!)
All this is saying is that we are not likely to produce a total proof
of Go by constructing the whole game tree. It doesn't necessarily
mean that we cannot produce incredibly strong Go players eventually
with much hard work.
Don
From: "TMCooper" <tmcooper@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 13:44:28 +0100
Sender: owner-computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Length: 329
<snip>
>
> This is one occasion when it is useful to call on the theoretical result,
> that Go is NP complete. Therefore there cannot be this sort of hidden
> secret, valid on boards of all sizes, depending only on computation linear
> in the board size.
>
> Charles
>
Do you know a reference for this result? Thanks. Tom.