On Nov 6, 2007 4:34 PM, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Territory scoring doesn't make the game end any sooner, it just > penalizes you for not doing so.
Right. In close games, the decision to pass is non-trivial. If protecting against an invasion causes a loss, then the invasion must be left open. This type of behavior is human-like. The only real exception is that weak humans like me don't count perfectly and exhibit this behavior in more cases than they should. If I'm ahead 40 points, I protect everything. > But I refrained for 2 reasons: > > 1. It makes everything more confusing and complicated. > > 2. There is a better way. Actually, I agree with you that the better way is the better way for the community as a whole. Similar to an occasional slow/fast tournament on KGS, I think some experimentation with territory scoring has some benefit. This style of behavior is pleasing to people, and I think some testing of it could be helpful. Many people prefer to end games the human lost gracefully rather than be forced to resign through long endgame. I think having a way to generate a lot of games to test this style of behavior is helpful. I really care little about the rules, except that it provides a mechanism to encourage the human-like behavior that I want my bot to exhibit. I mostly consider this discussion to be theoretical. I doubt anyone would implement this and put up a temporary server to play around with this behavior. All I'm really trying to say is that if someone did do it, I'd be happy to participate. My ultimate goals are slightly different than "create the strongest bot". I aim to make a bot that's fun to play and to add features to. Being the strongest would be a bonus ;)
_______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list [email protected] http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
