Re: computer-go: Computer-Human Comparisons

[Don Dailey <drd@xxxxxxx>]

   Traditional computer game methods, like computer chess, don't work for go,
   so a strong go program will use new algorithms.  I don't think they will
   be human-like though.

   David

I disagree about traditional computer game methods.  I have never felt
they  worked well  in computer  chess, chess  programs are  not strong
(unless  you  compare them  to  humans) and  they  are  have the  same
severely  limited horizon  problems (the  move looks  great  until you
search  just one  more  ply  deeper and  realize  you were  completely
misguided  because the  program  is  too stupid  to  realize the  true
concepts.)

You  are  right on  the  money  with  the human-like  statement.   New
algorithms  will problem  take advantage  of the  unique  strengths of
computers and try to limit there weakness using non-human ideas.

Don





   >  The first question is fairly clear to me at my level of play (~18k),
   >however current programs do appear to display a varying experience range
   >rather than a clear skill level. For example I think they can appear to play
   >to an average standard in the opening but at other times may make beginner
   >level mistakes that you would not expect from a human who played as the
   >program did in the opening.
   >
   >  I suppose only Go programmers will be able to answer 1a) but I would be
   >very interested in the answer. Looking back at my own attempts I have
   >discovered that the process of constructing appropriate algorithms to turn
   >into a program may have been distorted by the fact I was writing them to
   >become a computer program. Of course this was unintentional (and I'm unsure
   >whether it's a bad thing anyway), whilst I was simply trying to write a good
   >method for finding the best move given the algorithm, whether run on a
   >computer or by a human brain.
   >
   >  For question 2) I have been thinking that maybe it's a good idea to have a
   >computer program play like a human, since I expect my own 'algorithm' for
   >playing will change over time and so this simulation method could provide a
   >reasonable basis for a learning go playing program architecture. Of course
   >the implementation might be a stumper ;)
   >
   >  Any opinions or thoughts would be very welcome,
   >
   >  Julian Churchill