Re: computer-go: A problem with understanding lookahead

[Don Dailey <drd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I don't think it's "dead simple", but I  don't see that  it is a whole
lot  more  complicated  than  chess  either.   It's  really  the  huge
branching factor that makes it hard to write a program that plays well
relative to good humans.  If our chess programs could only think ahead
1 ply they would play much weaker than Go programs.  Evaluators in Go,
while not  very good, are  probably better  than  evaluators in Chess.
But the searches you can do in Chess just blow away this advantage.

Don



   From: Rafael Caetano dos Santos <rcaetano@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

   Vincent Diepeveen writes:
   (...)
   > My vision is that making a go program is dead simple, but that
   > the only problem is the branching factor!

   Sorry, Vincent, but for me this is akin to say:
   "Solving the Traveler Salesman Problem is dead simple, the only
   problem is the combinatorial explosion".

   Or maybe I didn't get what you meant.

   bye 
       Rafael Caetano <rcaetano@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>