RE: computer-go: gnu-go agreement protocol

[Sai To Wang <saitowang_go@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi everyone,

IMO, in a computer vs computer game, if there is no
human involve in the scoring, the Japanese scoring
rule is not adequate because of the current computer
program strength.
Is the same for the “two consecutive passes” kind of
end game protocol.

What we are doing is designing a protocol that need to
meet some requirement like:
low complexity
play through network like Internet and LAN
accurately determine the winner or draw
force both player to follow the rules that they
agreed. (not the end game part)
...

Other art kind of thing are mostly not necessary.

For me, the major reason to make a development like
this is for program to easily play to other program
with minimum human supervision, gathering as much
feedback as possible, so that the program’s strengths
and weaknesses can be verify much easier and with more
accuracy. That’s one way to help to make a stronger
program.

So, the scoring part of the protocol can be like this:
if one player resign, he losses.
always play until no legal move possible OR the only
legal move is to fill in one of the last two eyes of
any group except seki. (the arbiter may give the stop
signal ?)
use Chinese scoring.

We all know that the use of Japanese scoring rules
require much more skill. And the possibility of
disagreement in winning or losing judgment between
Japanese and Chinese scoring is negligible for the
current program strength.

Is true that make the game end some 100 play before
the everything is fill up make the game prettier and
cleaner for human to read, but only the person want to
read to the end.

It is too early to say that we are developing a
program to play “Like” human, is more likely that we
need a program to play decent GO first.

Sai To

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/