This is an exercise in proving that computers have more memory and
processing power than before I feel. To solve a game, very little
programming skill is necessary. The strategy for using processing power can
only be one of a limited set of possible strategies. A game that is not
solvable by
apparently you are not missing anything.
Cheers,
David
On 19, Jul 2007, at 12:50 PM, Nick Apperson wrote:
This is an exercise in proving that computers have more memory and
processing power than before I feel. To solve a game, very little
programming skill is necessary. The strategy
other than this was a very big problem, so it likely did require a
fair amount of programming skill.
Cheers,
David
On 19, Jul 2007, at 12:53 PM, David Doshay wrote:
apparently you are not missing anything.
Cheers,
David
___
computer-go
my guess is that you are in fact missing something --
it seems unlikely that they enumerated _on disk_ all
possible games and their correct response moves.
anything taking up less space than that would require
something more intelligent (or at least with a better
capacity to collapse situations)
Aye this sounds less like a checkers engine w/ AI and more like a
checkers egtb generator to root position. Which is still impressive. I
wonder how large the dataset is. Also fascinating is that it took 18
years of solid computation on ~50 computers.
I've never heard of a sustained computation
On 7/19/07, steve uurtamo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
my guess is that you are in fact missing something --
it seems unlikely that they enumerated _on disk_ all
possible games and their correct response moves.
anything taking up less space than that would require
something more intelligent (or at
I have to agree with Steve. Very often articles like this are not very
accurate or scientific.
But I do know that checkers programs hit their endgame databases in the
openings and that Chinook is very close to perfect play.
They have probably constructed an opening book by trial and error
On 7/19/07, Chris Fant [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 7/19/07, steve uurtamo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
my guess is that you are in fact missing something --
it seems unlikely that they enumerated _on disk_ all
possible games and their correct response moves.
anything taking up less space than
On 7/19/07, Chris Fant [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 7/19/07, steve uurtamo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
my guess is that you are in fact missing something --
it seems unlikely that they enumerated _on disk_ all
possible games and their correct response moves.
anything taking up less space than
http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/jul07/5379 seems to be a fairly decent article
about the Chinook
teams' solving of the Checkers game.
To recap, they built an endgame database which has all board positions with 10
or fewer pieces. Once you reach the endgame database, you no longer expand the
thanks, that's an excellent synopsis of what happened.
i should have looked for the article,
s.
- Original Message
From: terry mcintyre [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: computer-go computer-go@computer-go.org
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2007 4:31:03 PM
Subject: Re: [computer-go] Draughts / Checkers
Awesome. I believe similar aproach also in game of Go.
I short that there is no limit how smartly you can store information and thats
why I believe Erik e.t.c research in small board sizes is important and why I
have tried to study TSP kernighan kind of algorithms those don't search even
An interesting recap of how the hype can sometimes far outpace the reality:
http://www.cs.ualberta.ca/~chinook/project/legacy.html
Terry McIntyre [EMAIL PROTECTED]
They mean to govern well; but they mean to govern. They promise to be kind
masters; but they mean to be masters. -- Daniel
On Thu, 2007-07-19 at 18:52 -0700, Ray Tayek wrote:
those of you using c might find some of these useful:
http://graphics.stanford.edu/~seander/bithacks.html
This comes up with a totally blank page. When I view page source it is
also blank.
Does anyone else have this problem?
- Don
No. In my firefox, the page is fine.
___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Ok, it works now.
- Don
On Thu, 2007-07-19 at 22:44 -0400, Don Dailey wrote:
On Thu, 2007-07-19 at 18:52 -0700, Ray Tayek wrote:
those of you using c might find some of these useful:
http://graphics.stanford.edu/~seander/bithacks.html
This comes up with a totally blank page. When I
For anyone else interested in this topic, I recommend Hackers's
Delight. It is a book full of similar tricks and explanations.
On 7/20/07, elife [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No. In my firefox, the page is fine.
___
computer-go mailing list
Greetings,
What kind of data structures do you all use for your engines, in
respect to board representation and move generation. I know in chess
bitboard, mailbox board[8][8], 0x88 exist all with their pro's and
cons. Are there similar concepts for Go?
-Josh
2007/7/20, Joshua Shriver [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
What kind of data structures do you all use for your engines, in
respect to board representation and move generation. I know in chess
bitboard, mailbox board[8][8], 0x88 exist all with their pro's and
cons. Are there similar concepts for Go?
Below
In the engine I've been working on for a week or two (I'm brand new to
computer-go)
I use:
typedef int INTERSECTION;
typedef enum { BLACK, WHITE, EMPTY } COLOR;
struct GROUP
{
INTERSECTION base;
COLOR color;
int count;
int liberties;
INTERSECTION children[5];
INTERSECTION
20 matches
Mail list logo
