[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [computer-go] SlugGo v.s. Many Faces update
On 31, Mar 2005, at 7:46 PM, bump wrote:
GNU Go's opening weaknesses seem to be:
(1) a tendency to make bad tenuki's. This problem is
not special to the opening, but it is often in the
opening that GNU Go plays away from an urgent position
to take a big point somewhere else.
It is my observation that SlugGo has an even higher
tendency to play away. But my playing strength is
very close to that of SlugGo, so I cannot be as sure
if it is good or bad. In some games against a 1 dan
he found SlugGo's tendency to tenuki interesting
but not always bad.
(2) GNU Go doesn't really understand the importance of
making a base. (That is, an extension along the side
where eyes are most easily gotten.) If a stone on
the side (such as K3 or K4) is approached from
one side, extending on the other is reflexive but
GNU Go doesn't understand this principle.
I will look more closely at SlugGo's play with this in mind.
If these two defects are addressed, the opening play
would be stronger.
For the first, it would be good to have a measure
of the local temperature. That is, with play restricted
to a particular area, what is the difference between
the valuation between a W move there and a B move?
If it is large, then a move in that area is urgent.
This is not a test that GNU Go makes, but it would
be not hard to implement in GNU Go, and trivial in a
metamachine such as GoFigure or SlugGo.
I will have to learn more about this. This is a feature we
could add to SlugGo in the near future.
Right now we are trying for a feature freeze from now
until the Cotsen Open at the end of April. We have
more than enough to do just to try and find parameters
that play OK and hopefully will keep us from loosing
all our games on time.
Cheers,
David
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/