Re: computer-go: Programs learning to play Go

[Jeffrey Sorenson <jsorenson@xxxxxxxx>]

Joan Pons i Semelis wrote:
 <snip>

> Goal oriented is how human play, and it works pretty well. But still, when
> deciding how to try to
> implement the strategy and if it works at all, we are very good at looking only at

> a very few moves, the main difference between weak and strong players is which
> moves they look at ("this is not a move" or "this move does not
> exist" are usual comments of strong players), even more deciding than the strategy

> chosen when it involves weak groups or the timing to make the first really big
> yose move.

Jeffrey Sorenson opines:
The comments "this is not a move" or "this move does not exist" reveals a key, I
think.  The strong players are able to abstract the dynamics of a _particular_ game
to such an extent that it is immediately apparent to them that a proposed move may
fail to address the essential issues present.

I will define 'dynamics of  the particular game' with Dave Dyer's earlier comment:
"strong interactions both within and among abstraction layers.  For example, whether

group A in the northwest corner of the board is safe depends on whether isolated
stone B on the opposite corner is 2 or 3 spaces away from stone C on the third
line."  Clearly this 'dynamic' represents the salient differences from one game to
another.

It is indeed our inability to define that dynamic that limits the strength not only
of our individual play but also the selection of moves considered by the evaluation
functions we write.  Hekki's desire for a utility  that could become an 'idea
investigator' seems to me quite promising, though I see no _need_ for a NN
approach.  (I know very little about the issues of NN.)

I think Joan Pons i Semelis nailed the current bottleneck in Go programming with the

observation that 'we can only examine a few moves well, the big challenge is pruning

the tree.'  It seems to me as well that we need more higher level approaches.

Many thanks to Joan Pons i Semelis, Dave Dyer, Heikki Levanto, Jasiak, Boon, Tromp,
Fotland (gee, the list goes on and on) and many others for sharing their ideas here!

:-)
Jeffrey Sorenson


People demand freedom of speech to make up for the freedom of thought which they
avoid.
        - Kierkegaard