RE: computer-go:life and death

[Tim Klinger <klinger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 29 May 2001, Mark Boon wrote:
> In my opinion David is right that a lot of the things described are actually
> already done by existing programs, just in a less formalized way. I think
> that both the statement that 'such an analysis is beyond current go-playing
> programs' and later that your system solves the problem in only a few nodes
> 'very much smaller than big-search computer solutions' are false. You have
> solved the problem using a different approach and representation than that
> of existing programs, achieving similar results in a less efficient manner.
> You still have to prove that your system offers advantages that in the long
> run will lead to better or faster results than the traditional approach.

Well, I've explained several times what the first sentence meant (to me at
least).  The 'very much smaller' sentence is practically tautological.  
By definition "big-search" means a search (like brute-force)
which examines many nodes.  Our solutions considered relatively few nodes.  

I think you're right in your assessment that the proof of the validity of
our approach lies in its scalability to harder problems.


> 
> (My god, this Ghostscript is a program from the middle-ages. Please make it
> available in a more friendly format, like PDF, next time you publish
> something on the web.)

I'll be sure to do that next time.

Tim