>> I.e. it makes the diagonal directions more important, compared to moves >> in a straight line. > > I try to make that apparent in the presentation, and maybe also in the > name I use - it creates circle-like structures on the square grid. In > other words, increments in gridcular metric approximate increments in > the classical Euclidean metric. At the same time, the increments provide > quite fine granularity in the area covered, which is also useful in the > usual application - matching of variable-sized patterns.
But why is that better for go? Have you (or anyone) compared each way, and this gives some quantitative improvement? It seems to me that for variable-sized patterns that simple manhattan distance fits go better. Darren -- Darren Cook, Software Researcher/Developer http://dcook.org/gobet/ (Shodan Go Bet - who will win?) http://dcook.org/work/ (About me and my work) http://dcook.org/blogs.html (My blogs and articles) _______________________________________________ Computer-go mailing list [email protected] http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
