Re: [computer-go] citation

[Nicol Schraudolph <compgo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, 14 Jul 2004, David Weiss wrote:

> I don't think that the issue has as much to do
> with the size of the board, as the fact that there
> is a single objective in Chess, checkmate the king.
> Imagine if the board was larger, but there were
> 5 kings and you had to capture 3 of them to win.

Excellent, now I finally  know how to explain Go to chess players:
there are 180 kings a side, but they can't move... :-)

Seriously, this is what Go can feel like from a chess perspective.


On Wed, 14 Jul 2004, David Weiss wrote:

> One aspect hasn't been mentioned yet in this thread AFAICS: it is not
> the case that go programs are not playing well but that people are.

This is a very good point.  Humans play go much better than chess because
go directly ties into the strengths of our visual system, such as pattern
recognition and completion.  Chess is like reading "under the stones" all
the time, which is significantly harder than, say, reading a ladder (to
tie 3 current topics into a single post :-) across an open board.

The worst game in this regard is othello/reversi, where pieces change
color at every move - it's no wonder that computers are much better at
that than humans.

Best,

- nic

-- 
    Dr. Nicol N. Schraudolph               http://www.schraudolph.org/
    Sonnenkopfweg 17
    D-87527 Sonthofen, Germany



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