Re: [computer-go] Computer Olympiad photo

[Don Dailey <drd@xxxxxxx>]

Hi Vincent,

> Because if this is the case, beating go players with a brute force search
> is going to be far from easy. 

The point I'm making is that you don't know which approach is best.  I
don't think  you or anyone  else knows how  to make a go  program that
solves the problems you mentioned.  If you did, then you could show me
how yours works and mine doesn't.   But I don't think that's the case,
right?  

I don't advocate brute force  either, I believe the approach that will
eventually  take  hold  as  computers  become faster  is  that  global
selective search  will gradually be  introduced into Go  programs (the
ones not  already doing it.)  These  searches won't solve  the 150 ply
problem  you  mentioned,  but  they  will solve  lots  of  short  term
oversights and  make the  programs much stronger.   YOU DON'T  HAVE TO
SOLVE EVERY PROBLEM TO MAKE  IT A LOT BETTER.  Chess programs improved
very very slowly over a long  period of time.  They never solved chess
or even came close.  You can embarass any chess program by giving them
problems  that humans  can  easily solve  but  they can't.   Knowledge
engineering in GO will get better, but there is a point of diminishing
returns  where it  takes a  lot of  extra computing  time to  make the
smallest progress.   Some of  that time will  be better spent  doing a
search.

Let me ask the programmers this hypothetical question: If I gave you a
computer 1  trillion times faster than  what you have  now, would your
program play  a lot better?  If  you changed your  program, what would
you do to utilize those extra compute cycles?



- Don



_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go