RE: [computer-go] Addressing the root of the problem

["Nicol N. Schraudolph" <compgo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> I think my hypothesis is the same as yours: because the complexity of go
> is coming from its small set of rules (but very well designed), its
> solution should be something similar.

Isn't the opposite true?  Our physical universe after all is at some level
based on rather simple rules (quantum mechanics), but that doesn't make it
easy to achieve any particular goal - say: building a bumblebee - in it.
That's emergent complexity, and go has plenty of it.  Games with little
emergent complexity (which are easier to model) on the other hand tend
to have more complex rulesets, in order to reach a level of complexity
that makes play interesting to humans.

Best,

- nic

-- 
    Dr. Nicol Schraudolph                      work: +61-2-612-51552
    RSISE, bldg. 115, room B148                home:          -51115
    Australian National University              fax:          -58645
    Canberra, ACT 0200
    Australia                              http://n.schraudolph.org/

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