In terms of sheer playing performance, Monte Carlo and DCNN leave Gnu Go in the dust.
But even Alphago has the fundamental flaw that it doesn't "know" what it's doing, because neither DCNN nor Monte Carlo embodies the basic concept of commonsense intelligence, namely being able to construct and reason about a meaningful computational model of the dynamics of the world. Here is one example of how a program design which does embody such commonsense can find a better move than Alphago did at move 79 in game 4 of its match with Lee Sedol, because it does "know" what it is doing. The program is designed, but it's up to others to turn it in to software. Could it beat Alphago across the board, and with much less hardware? The design includes new algorithms for computing territory and influence, group strength, and strategic and tactical reasoning. It can talk about what it's thinking so would thus be useful to people learning Go. text: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2818149 video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nns70047Rxo&index=27&list=PL4y5WtsvtduqNW0AKlSsOdea3Hl1X_v-S _______________________________________________ gnugo-devel mailing list gnugo-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnugo-devel
