[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: computer-go: Most simple Go rules




I understand your point, Nick. Every tournament includes some new programs, and sometimes
they get paired, so have to be able to deal with two passes with unsettled groups on the board or worse,
non-enclosed territory.

I was just responding the assertion that "no program is strong enough...", by giving some counterexamples.

David

At 11:14 AM 6/26/2001 +0100, you wrote:
In message <5.0.2.1.0.20010626000512.02cea7f0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
David Fotland <fotland@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes
>At 02:52 PM 6/25/2001 +0200, you wrote:
>>Nick Wedd wrote:
>>
>> > I imagine that this is because programmers are unwilling to implement
>> > it.  They want their programs to play something that resembles grown-up
>> > Go.
>>
>>Yes. But maintaining the pretense creates confusion, since no program is
>>strong enough to accurately decide L&D, seki, ko, etc. at the point where
>>humans would agree to end the game.
>
>This is not true.  Go4++ and Many Faces play on IGS, and pass correctly at
>the end of the game, and score correctly.  I've seen Many Faces make
>scoring mistakes in
>perhaps 1 in 500 games, usually when there is some very strange seki.

If all programs were as competently written as Many Faces, this whole
discussion would not be necessary.  Many Faces plays in a grown-up way,
and would be happy to use a hard ball.  What I am looking for is a way
of running a CG event which lets new entrants to the field compete
without making too many demands on their programmers.

Nick
--
Nick Wedd
David Fotland