Re: [computer-go] Pattern matching - example play

[Don Dailey <drd@xxxxxxx>]

   X-Original-To: computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
   DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com;
	   h=received:return-path:reply-to:from:to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:x-priority:x-msmail-priority:x-mailer:x-mimeole:in-reply-to:importance;
	   b=FfHgK4ceM+ueOHdW0RJiFM2TPHtBkOfUmzRo8Vkmm96vYJJkLKDJxq/XCKvftzUY8jnxb4yN+pV+f3O4kWVdb4ja0loySsw7YmdMy/pHAwuS7YXf7zHq54zeotGk1Z4iGuaSddtjd5PzixnGmOz75e5x9W0gfpd5/yYuNmWRdvg=
   From: "Mark Boon" <tesujisoftware@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
   Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 12:42:51 -0200
   X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
   X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
   X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441
   Importance: Normal
   Reply-To: tesujisoftware@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, computer-go <computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
   Sender: computer-go-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
   X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.42

   > -----Original Message-----
   > From: computer-go-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
   > [mailto:computer-go-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Erik van der
   > Werf
   > Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2004 17:01
   > To: computer-go
   > Subject: Re: [computer-go] Pattern matching - example play
   >
   > Personally I think that at the current level of computer Go 9x9 is very
   > interesting. After all beginners start on 9x9, not on 19x19. If we
   > cannot even build a decent 9x9 player how can we ever hope to succeed on
   > 19x19?

   That may be true but still not relevant. If we're mainly interested in
   making a Go program play 19x19 (which I think most of us are) then 'solving'
   9x9 does not guarantee to bring us much closer to our goal of making a 19x19
   program. The effort involved in making a program play well on 9x9 may not be
   a good investment when your goal is really 19x19.

I'm not so sure.  The thing  that's really appealing about 9x9 is that
your whole testing/learning cycle can  go much faster.  I think it's a
really  nice way  to start  with, for  example, programs  that  try to
learn.   I  really  believe  most  of the  lessons  learned  could  be
tranfered more or less directly to any board size.    So the cycle
might be:

  1. Figure out what and how you need to build a strong 7x7/9x9 go program.
  2. Build and test it.   
  3. Reiterate with bigger boards.

I'm not  sure anyone has even  created a really strong  7x7 GO program
have they?  Can any of us create  a 7x7 that can hold it's own against
any player?  I doubt it.  I think it's not so crazy to try to get that
right first.

Probably  one would use  techniques that  remain applicable  to bigger
boards.  So  things like  brute force search  on 7x7 boards  might not
really be a quickly scalable approach.

- Don

  





   _______________________________________________
   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/