Re: [computer-go] Tactical search: alpha-beta or and-or?

[Mark Boon <tesujisoftware@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 5/23/05, Darren Cook <darren@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> I firmly believe "good lib tac search" would give better results than a
> simple N+ libs is alive search, for the same CPU time. The downside is
> code complexity and working out the best combination of parameters (e.g.
> 4 good libs where a good lib is 2 slibs, or 2 good libs where a good lib
> is 3 slibs, or ....)
> 

Tactics are good to get information which stones are guaranteed to be
captured in N moves. But to determine them alive when they cannot be
captured after some arbitrary N is a weak concept.

Eyes are arguably the most important concept in Go. Determining the
status of stones without taking into account the concept of eyes is
always going to be orders of magnitude inferior than anything that
does take them into account.

So my advice is to focus more on eyes instead of a complicated
tactical module that can read tactics with N>3. It's CPU cycles better
spent.
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/