>Yes but once you know which stones you can disregard as being dead, >counting the board becomes a simple flood-fill exercise, isn't it?
I was thinking the same thing: basically play out the position using UCT. If you have a few hundred trials UCT, you might get very accurate play. A downside: you might have to play many moves to reach a terminal position, and your UCT must prefer high point differential. Or just use one search of a thousand UCT trials, where we keep track of how often a point is black/white at the end of the game. Then assume that stones that live with probability < T are dead. My guess is that either of these approaches can be made to work to the standard that Dave Dyer suggests: usually correct to within a few points. Brian _______________________________________________ Computer-go mailing list [email protected] http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
