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

[Imran Ghory <imran@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sat, 4 Dec 2004, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:

> At 02:37 4-12-2004 +0100, Arend Bayer wrote:
> >
> >On Fri, 3 Dec 2004, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
> >
> >> >I would not completely write off higher-level planning and neural nets,
> >> >and other fancy theories. Many of them have shown their values in
> >>
> >> I have written them off after i learned a lot about them and experimented
> >> with them myself. Additional it won't be a surprise to you that worlds
> >> biggest ANN experts are chatting to the programmers so also to me and they
> >> can exactly define the problem for you.
> >>
> >> The problem is that game playing programs each time play an unique game. So
> >> they should train in order to recognize something they didn't train at!
> >>
> >> That's a contradiction and therefore it is not possible.
> >
> >> We can have lengthy discussions, but the majority of ANN top researchers
> >> agree with me here that for game playing ANN is completely useless.
> >
> >So you would claim that neural nets are worthless for game like, say,
> >backgammon?
>
> Backgammon is a statistical game where statistics drive the game.
>
> It is not a game tree search like go or chess are.

Nine men's morris and Connect 4 however both are, and both can be played
to a very high (better than human) level by neural networks.

Imran
-- 
http://bits.bris.ac.uk/imran
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/