RE: [computer-go] Is seki problem solved ?

["Mark Boon" <tesuji@xxxxxxxxx>]

|OOOOXXXXX
|XXXXOOOOX
|OOXbOXXOX
|OaX.OX.OX
----------

O can win by playing suicide at 'a'. X can prevent it by playing at 'b', but
there exists a more complicated example based on the principle above where X
can't prevent it even.

This was found by Guus Rol a long time ago in his quest 'Is there life after
death?' and published in the Dutch Go journal, but I can't remember the
exact position.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: computer-go-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:computer-go-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Arthur Cater
> Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 2004 13:30
> To: computer-go
> Subject: RE: [computer-go] Is seki problem solved ?
>
>
> Mark Boon wrote:
> >To the answer whether seki is 'solved', I seriously doubt it's solved
> >theoretically and definitely not by a program. There are situations that
> >look like seki, until one of the sides plays multiple-suicide to win. I'm
> >pretty sure no existing program actually even 'tries' suicide moves.
>
>
> I'm intrigued by this. Do you mean killing by nakade, or suicide moves
> in rulesets that allow them, or something else? If something else, would
> you please point to an example (or, of course, construct one if
> you prefer)?
>
> Arthur
> _______________________________________________
> computer-go mailing list
> computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
>

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