Practical programs have time constraints. Play whichever winning move you discover first.
On Sat, Sep 11, 2021, 2:48 AM YKY (Yan King Yin, 甄景贤) < [email protected]> wrote: > When thinking about the game of Tic Tac Toe, > I found that it is most natural to allow assumptions in the logic rules. > > For example, in the definition of a potential "fork", > in which the player X can win in 2 ways. > > How can we write the rules to determine a potential fork? > Here is a very "natural" way to state it: > > assume X plays move a: > assume O plays an arbitrary (non-winning) move, > assume X plays move b then X wins, > or, assume X plays move c then X wins, > and b != c > then x is a potential fork. > > So I wonder how can a logic inference engine handle assumptions? > Does OpenCog or NARS have this ability? > > Thanks :) > YKY ------------------------------------------ Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI Permalink: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T74958068c4e0a30f-Mf9405d9d8deeebb0d7756615 Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription
