Learned rules from pure stats might be good guiding posts, but the pure checking of millions of board positions is always going to be necessary.
My $0.02, s. On Sep 4, 2015 3:49 PM, "Jim O'Flaherty" <jim.oflaherty...@gmail.com> wrote: > I disagree with the assertion MC must be the starting point. It appears to > have stagnated into a local optima; i.e. it's going to take something > different to dislodge MC, just like it took MC to dislodge the traditional > approaches preceding MC's introduction a decade ago. Ultimately, I think it > can serve to inform a higher level conceptual system > > And while I don't get his videos (they are way to ADHD scattered and > discontinuous for my personal ability to focus and internalize), I think I > grok the general direction he'd like to see things head. And I am quite > ambivalent about the idea of creating and using linguistic semantic trees > as an approach, as much or even more than I was about MC when it emerged. > > On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 10:55 AM, Stefan Kaitschick < > stefan.kaitsch...@hamburg.de> wrote: > >> So far I have not criticised but asked questions. I am a great fan of the >> expert system approach because a) I have studied go knowledge a lot and >> see, in principle, light at the end of the tunnel, b) I think that "MC + >> expert system" or "only expert system" can be better than MC if the expert >> system is well designed, c) an expert system can, in principle, provide >> more meaningful insight for us human duffers than an MC because the expert >> system can express itself in terms of reasoning. (Disclaimer: There is a >> good chance that I will criticise anybody presenting his definitions for >> use in an expert system. But who does not dare to be criticised does not >> learn!) >> >> MC is currently stagnating, so looking at new (or old discarded) >> approaches has become more attractive again. >> But I don't think that a "classic" rules based system will be of much use >> from here. It is just too far removed from MC concepts to be productively >> integrated into an MC system. And no matter what, MC has to be the starting >> point, because it is so much more effective than anything else that has >> been tried.What you are left to work with, is the trail of statistics that >> MC leaves behind. That is the only tunnel with a possible end to it that I >> see. And who knows, maybe someone will find statistical properties that can >> be usefully mapped back to human concepts of go. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Computer-go mailing list >> Computer-go@computer-go.org >> http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Computer-go mailing list > Computer-go@computer-go.org > http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go >
_______________________________________________ Computer-go mailing list Computer-go@computer-go.org http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
