And what is the connection between the number of "positions" and the number of games or even solving games? In the game trees we do not care about positions, but about situations. For the game tree it indeed matters whos turn it is, which moves are legal, and if super-ko rules are used which positions are legal and which aren't. It will be tough to solve the game even for a single position without having this information.
I'm actually surprised that this "absurd" to you... 2017-08-09 17:48 GMT+02:00 John Tromp <john.tr...@gmail.com>: > > Under which ruleset is the 3^(n*n) a trivial upper bound for the number > of > > legal positions? > > Under all rulesets. > > > Unless we talk about simply the visual aspect > > Yes, we do. > > > but then this has > > absolutely nothing to do with the discussion abour solving games. > > If you want the notion of "position" to encode everything needed to > determine legality of future plays, then in the case of superko, you > need the entire set of previous board configurations, which to me is > rather absurd. > Instead you should call that "situation". > That's how we distinguish the two flavors of superko; > positional vs situational... > > regards, > -John > _______________________________________________ > 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
