On 7/26/07, Darren Cook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The statement "will never give a strong computer go program." is rather > > devoid of meaning. You either should define "strong" ... > > OK, I'll add something. By strong I mean dan level.
In that case, the statement seems downright wrong. We know from both theory and Dan's experiments that there is no limit to the strength of UCT with random playouts. Maybe you only meant MC Go without UCT? _______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list [email protected] http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
