Re: computer-go: Engineering (was: Most simple Go rules)

[Nick Wedd <nick@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

In message <5144A3121B37D411BC0100508B955A1801024AE9@USPALX20>,
Grajdeanu, Adrian <adrian.grajdeanu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes

>Much controversy on this chinese/japanese. Many are just bashing the jap
>rules for them not being logical. Still I would love it for my program to
>play by jap rules. Because it is much more difficult to control territory
>without occupying it. Somehow makes the game even more 'intelligent'. I
>think that I like territory counting as opposed to area counting (if I
>understood right the thread so far) and to me this is the major difference
>between jap/chi rules. Am I wrong?

Using Japanese rather than Chinese rules does not make the game more
'intelligent'.  With a few exceptions * % the value of a move under one
ruleset is a constant plus the value of that move under the other
ruleset.

Here is a reason for preferring Chinese rules for CG.  IMHO, it is the
main reason.
    At the end of a game between humans, there is a "negotiation phase".
Each player makes assertions about the status of groups, and there is a
procedure for resolving any disagreements.  This is not just a
theoretical construct, this is what really happens at the end of a game
between two human 9-kyus.
    Computers cannot do this negotiation.  Therefore, the only way a
computer has for demonstrating that an enemy group is dead, is to
capture it.  Under J rules, it cannot do this without incurring a
penalty.  Under C rules, there is no penalty for demonstrating, after
the last constructive move but before the game end, that an enemy group
can be captured.


*  Chinese rules count territory in a seki
%  Under Chinese rules, it may be correct to fill dame before fighting
the last small ko

Nick
-- 
Nick Wedd