[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.