RE: computer-go: Dobbelt moves

[Petersen Kjeld-WFKP1396 <Kjeld.Petersen@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Am I right in this assumption ???

The calculation of the value of subgame A, B and C is depending on which subgames are possible, and not which are probably !!!!
In this way you may have at situation as you describe ?

B will be greater than A if only B and A are possible
C will be greater than B if only C and B are possible
A will be greater than C if only A and C are possible 

this seems (fuzzy) logic to me !!!

but what happens if A AND B AND C are possible ???
Then you have a tie if the delta value of AB, BC and CA are equal. 
Bad luck, make a random move !!! (miai moves)
Or go deeper into the subgame to determine the delta value !!!

But if the delta value is not equal, then you can choose the move with the greater delta value or not ????
Or if you donn't like the size of the delta values of the delta values (again fuzzy logic) then go deeper into the subgame until you have a delta value which is as big as you want ?


-----Original Message-----
From: Jean-Pierre Vesinet [mailto:jpvesinet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: 27. februar 2001 19:26
To: 'computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx'
Subject: RE: computer-go: Dobbelt moves


More comments added to Eric's post:

> >From: William Harold Newman <william.newman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> >The analysis and examples in _Mathematical Go_ (Berlekamp and Wolfe,
> >ISBN 1-56881-032-6) show that the importance of moves is only
> >partially ordered. Since real numbers are totally ordered, you will
> >get less-than-ideal results if you try to express the importance of a
> >move with a single real number. Trying your theory on the examples in
> >the book would probably demonstrate this.

It is only true if you compare local subgames, not moves.
The relation of comparison between local subgames (even simple subgames,
without ko) is not transitive.
For example consider three ideally separated subgames A, B and C, perfect
play assumed.
If you have only A and B on the board you would rather play in B than in A.
If you have only B and C on the board you would rather play in C than in B.
But it is possible that if you have only A and C on the board you would
rather play in A than in C.
In short you can have A < B and B < C but A > C.

Total ordering for moves exists.