Re: [computer-go] Can Go be solved???... PLEASE help!
Seems like a silly title. Any game of perfect information that has a clear rule set can be solved. Plus, some would argue that any Go already is solved (write simple algorithm and wait 1 billion years while it runs). A better question is, Can Computer Go Surpass Human Go? But again, clearly it will. It's just a question of how long until it occurs. On 1/12/07, Mehdi Ahmadi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello thank in advance for any interests/ responses. I'm unfortunately (or not) doing a dissertation as part of my final year project (undergraduate) on the game of Go. The exact title is: Can the game of go be solved? Analysis of computational methodologies for go. And I have included my overall objectives below. I have many works from different people on different aspects of Computer Go which would make for great inclusion at different parts - but overall I am still gravely struggling. In reviewing some of these my greatest difficulty is in understanding exactly how say Monte-Carlo-UCT or even Alpha-Beta testing (pruning, etc) occur so as to be able to give a simplified depiction (illustrated or otherwise) of the process. Can this be done without having to go through the source code of say something like GNU Go? Also another difficulty I've had is in trying to get further information on the commonly referred top ranking packages, Handtalk, Go++, Many Faces of Go, etc due to their commercial nature? (the only thing I've been able to find which is a bit outdated: http://www.inventivity.com/OpenGo/Papers/EditedGoPapers.html). Lastly can any general categorisation - distinction be made of current approach/ implementations in trying to 'solve' Go. in comparison to say traditional disciplines used in trying to solve games (complex or otherwise) via computer? To put simply I am trying to have some core root comparison in current methodologies (if there is any?). If anyone has any suggestions/ guidance on anything mentioned - I would be eternally indebted. == 5.1 OBJECTIVES . To concisely review all game playing aspects of Go (rules, openings, middle game, etc) and its relevance to the complication of meaningful measurements of interest. . To evaluate, gain and develop further understanding of specific game aspects including (eg): - Representation: . Eyes . life-and-death . territory estimates and weakness - Move Evaluation: . Territorial and strategic affluence. . Address specific and current implementation methodologies including: - Search algorithms (Alpha-Beta - local/global, Monte-Carlo -UCT) - Move Generation - Positional Evaluation (Patterns, Neural Networks) . To detail inadequacies in research and reasons for shortfalls where applicable. ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Can Go be solved???... PLEASE help!
From http://senseis.xmp.net/?7x7BestPlay it looks like 7x7 Go may already have been solved. 5x5 was solved in 2002, according to http://erikvanderwerf.tengen.nl/5x5/5x5solved.html AFAIK, 9x9 Go has not been solved yet. 19x19 Go will surely exceed the capabilities of computers in my lifetime, I suspect. -- Terry McIntyre - Original Message From: Chris Fant [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: computer-go computer-go@computer-go.org Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 8:16:35 AM Subject: Re: [computer-go] Can Go be solved???... PLEASE help! Seems like a silly title. Any game of perfect information that has a clear rule set can be solved. Plus, some would argue that any Go already is solved (write simple algorithm and wait 1 billion years while it runs). A better question is, Can Computer Go Surpass Human Go? But again, clearly it will. It's just a question of how long until it occurs. On 1/12/07, Mehdi Ahmadi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello thank in advance for any interests/ responses. I'm unfortunately (or not) doing a dissertation as part of my final year project (undergraduate) on the game of Go. The exact title is: Can the game of go be solved? Analysis of computational methodologies for go. And I have included my overall objectives below. I have many works from different people on different aspects of Computer Go which would make for great inclusion at different parts - but overall I am still gravely struggling. In reviewing some of these my greatest difficulty is in understanding exactly how say Monte-Carlo-UCT or even Alpha-Beta testing (pruning, etc) occur so as to be able to give a simplified depiction (illustrated or otherwise) of the process. Can this be done without having to go through the source code of say something like GNU Go? Also another difficulty I've had is in trying to get further information on the commonly referred top ranking packages, Handtalk, Go++, Many Faces of Go, etc due to their commercial nature? (the only thing I've been able to find which is a bit outdated: http://www.inventivity.com/OpenGo/Papers/EditedGoPapers.html). Lastly can any general categorisation - distinction be made of current approach/ implementations in trying to 'solve' Go. in comparison to say traditional disciplines used in trying to solve games (complex or otherwise) via computer? To put simply I am trying to have some core root comparison in current methodologies (if there is any?). If anyone has any suggestions/ guidance on anything mentioned - I would be eternally indebted. == 5.1 OBJECTIVES . To concisely review all game playing aspects of Go (rules, openings, middle game, etc) and its relevance to the complication of meaningful measurements of interest. . To evaluate, gain and develop further understanding of specific game aspects including (eg): - Representation: . Eyes . life-and-death . territory estimates and weakness - Move Evaluation: . Territorial and strategic affluence. . Address specific and current implementation methodologies including: - Search algorithms (Alpha-Beta - local/global, Monte-Carlo -UCT) - Move Generation - Positional Evaluation (Patterns, Neural Networks) . To detail inadequacies in research and reasons for shortfalls where applicable. ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ Need Mail bonding? Go to the Yahoo! Mail QA for great tips from Yahoo! Answers users. http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=listsid=396546091___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Can Go be solved???... PLEASE help!
A much more up-to-date bibliography is maintained by Markus Enzenberger: http://www.cs.ualberta.ca/~emarkus/compgo_biblio/ Terry McIntyre Bored stiff? Loosen up... Download and play hundreds of games for free on Yahoo! Games. http://games.yahoo.com/games/front___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Can Go be solved???... PLEASE help!
There are a number of definitions of solved, ranging from a program exists that can beat any human to we can quickly determine, for any position, the best move and the result under optimal play. In the latter strong sense, I believe Go has only been solved up to 5x5, maybe 6x6. There are some games, such as Hex, for which we know who wins from the starting position given optimal play, but we don't know how to figure out the best move. Peter Drake Assistant Professor of Computer Science Lewis Clark College http://www.lclark.edu/~drake/ On Jan 12, 2007, at 8:45 AM, terry mcintyre wrote: From http://senseis.xmp.net/?7x7BestPlay it looks like 7x7 Go may already have been solved. 5x5 was solved in 2002, according to http://erikvanderwerf.tengen.nl/5x5/5x5solved.html AFAIK, 9x9 Go has not been solved yet. 19x19 Go will surely exceed the capabilities of computers in my lifetime, I suspect. -- Terry McIntyre - Original Message From: Chris Fant [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: computer-go computer-go@computer-go.org Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 8:16:35 AM Subject: Re: [computer-go] Can Go be solved???... PLEASE help! Seems like a silly title. Any game of perfect information that has a clear rule set can be solved. Plus, some would argue that any Go already is solved (write simple algorithm and wait 1 billion years while it runs). A better question is, Can Computer Go Surpass Human Go? But again, clearly it will. It's just a question of how long until it occurs. On 1/12/07, Mehdi Ahmadi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello thank in advance for any interests/ responses. I'm unfortunately (or not) doing a dissertation as part of my final year project (undergraduate) on the game of Go. The exact title is: Can the game of go be solved? Analysis of computational methodologies for go. And I have included my overall objectives below. I have many works from different people on different aspects of Computer Go which would make for great inclusion at different parts - but overall I am still gravely struggling. In reviewing some of these my greatest difficulty is in understanding exactly how say Monte-Carlo-UCT or even Alpha- Beta testing (pruning, etc) occur so as to be able to give a simplified depiction (illustrated or otherwise) of the process. Can this be done without having to go through the source code of say something like GNU Go? Also another difficulty I've had is in trying to get further information on the commonly referred top ranking packages, Handtalk, Go++, Many Faces of Go, etc due to their commercial nature? (the only thing I've been able to find which is a bit outdated: http://www.inventivity.com/OpenGo/Papers/EditedGoPapers.html). Lastly can any general categorisation - distinction be made of current approach/ implementations in trying to 'solve' Go. in comparison to say traditional disciplines used in trying to solve games (complex or otherwise) via computer? To put simply I am trying to have some core root comparison in current methodologies (if there is any?). If anyone has any suggestions/ guidance on anything mentioned - I would be eternally indebted. == 5.1 OBJECTIVES . To concisely review all game playing aspects of Go (rules, openings, middle game, etc) and its relevance to the complication of meaningful measurements of interest. . To evaluate, gain and develop further understanding of specific game aspects including (eg): - Representation: . Eyes . life-and-death . territory estimates and weakness - Move Evaluation: . Territorial and strategic affluence. . Address specific and current implementation methodologies including: - Search algorithms (Alpha-Beta - local/global, Monte-Carlo -UCT) - Move Generation - Positional Evaluation (Patterns, Neural Networks) . To detail inadequacies in research and reasons for shortfalls where applicable. ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ We won't tell. Get more on shows you hate to love (and love to hate): Yahoo! TV's Guilty Pleasures list. ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
[computer-go] Can Go be solved???... PLEASE help!
Thank your for your response, Chris. I think as Allis et al (1991, 1994) points out there is a difference in 'crackable' and 'solvable' where the former tend to be search-based complexities and the later decision-based complexity. Irrespective of the opponent via the cracking approach the best theoretical results can be achieved naturally even more easily if there are less decision-based considerations. Given the nature of go 'solvable', explicably in human terms, can pertain to an awful lot that is not so well defined to give rise to an exact or best solution or method by which to understand decisions? L. V. Allis. Searching for Solutions in Games and Artificial Intelligence. Ph.D. thesis, Rijksuniversiteit Limburg, Maastricht, The Netherlands, 1994. ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Testing against gnugo
Now there's an additional curiosity. The log of moves printed out by the GNU Go twogtp.py script seems to sometimes insert gratuitous passes or allow one player to play more than once in a row: Black plays c9 White plays B9 Black plays d7 White plays D6 Black plays h6 White plays D4 White passes White plays D8 Black plays c8 White plays D9 Black plays d5 Later, the script sent my program genmove black twice in a row, which of course confused it. What's going on here? Has anyone else run into these problems? Peter Drake Assistant Professor of Computer Science Lewis Clark College http://www.lclark.edu/~drake/ On Jan 12, 2007, at 9:05 AM, Peter Drake wrote: D'oh! I turns out this was the result of my program not handling the final_score command. It works fine now. I hope this helps others, Peter Drake Assistant Professor of Computer Science Lewis Clark College http://www.lclark.edu/~drake/ On Jan 12, 2007, at 8:47 AM, Peter Drake wrote: I used the Python version and it worked almost perfectly on the first try -- thanks! Here's the command I used: python /Applications/gnugo-3.6/interface/gtp_examples/twogtp.py -- black 'path to my program here' --white '/usr/local/bin/gnugo -- mode gtp --quiet --level 1 --never-resign --chinese-rules -- capture-all-dead' --verbose 2 --komi 7.5 --size 9 It played out the game, but at the end this happened: Black passes A B C D E F G H J 9 O O . O . O O O . 9 8 O O O O O O . O O 8 7 . O O . O O O . O 7 6 O O O O O . O O . 6 5 O O O O O O . O O 5 4 . O O . O . O O . 4 3 O O + O . O O . O 3 2 O . O O O O O O . 2 WHITE (O) has captured 51 stones 1 . O . O . O . O O 1 BLACK (X) has captured 0 stones A B C D E F G H J Game 1: W+88.5 ERROR: GTP Command failed: unknown command Game 1: ERROR: GTP Command failed: unknown command W+88.5 White: 3.400s CPU time I interpret this to mean that the script sent W+88.5 as a GTP command to my program, which of course didn't understand it. Is this standard GTP or something specific to GNU Go? Would a reasonable response be to silently acknowledge any command whose second character is +? (Lest Orego's honor be besmirched, I should clarify that I was only allowing Orego one second per move while testing out the protocol. Hopefully it won't get wiped off the board by GNU Go level 1 if I give Orego more time.) Peter Drake Assistant Professor of Computer Science Lewis Clark College http://www.lclark.edu/~drake/ On Nov 20, 2006, at 3:44 AM, alain Baeckeroot wrote: Le vendredi 17 novembre 2006 18:41, Peter Drake a écrit : Orego speaks GTP, as does gnugo. I'd like to run a bunch of games (say, 50) between them to see how many Orego wins. Does anyone have a handy script (ideally bash or Python) for this? Thanks, Peter Drake Assistant Professor of Computer Science Lewis Clark College http://www.lclark.edu/~drake/ Hi In GNU Go package you have tools interface/gtp_examples/ twogtp.xyz in various languages. my 2 cents Alain ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Can Go be solved???... PLEASE help!
Seems like a silly title. Any game of perfect information that has a clear rule set can be solved. Plus, some would argue that any Go already is solved (write simple algorithm and wait 1 billion years while it runs). A better question is, Can Computer Go Surpass Human Go? But again, clearly it will. It's just a question of how long until it occurs. Without being too pedantic, I'd like to note that although all two-player games with perfect information and finite length have winning strategies, it is not always the case that they are either computable or decidable. This caveat likely does not apply to games such as 19x19 go, but it just might apply to the question of finding a winning strategy for go on an NxN board, for instance. For an example of such a game, see: J.P. Jones, Some undecidable determined games, International Journal of Game Theory, 11 (1982) s. 8:00? 8:25? 8:40? Find a flick in no time with the Yahoo! Search movie showtime shortcut. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/shortcuts/#news ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Can Go be solved???... PLEASE help!
On 12-jan-07, at 14:16, Chris Fant wrote: Plus, some would argue that any Go already is solved (write simple algorithm and wait 1 billion years while it runs). To 'solve' a game in the strict sense you need to know the best answer to every move. And you need to be able to prove that it's the best move. To do so you need to look at the following number of positions AMP^(AGL/2) where AMP is average number of moves in a position and AGL is the average game length. If I take a conservative AGL of 260 moves, we can compute the AMP from that, being (365+(365- AGL))/2=235 So we get 235^130, which is about 10^300 as a lower bound. The upper bound is something like 195^170 (play until all groups have 2 eyes) which my calculator is unable to compute, but I think it's roughly 10^400. I'm guessing it's questionable whether we'd be able to compute that even with a computer the size of this planet before the sun goes out. Distributing the work over other planets or star-sysems will only help marginally due to the time it takes to send information to Earth by the speed of light. So I'd say it's impossible. Mark ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Can Go be solved???... PLEASE help!
And Mark Boon also neglected the future use of wormholes, replicators and who knows what? :) Sorry, but how do you what future quantum computers can churn so much data? 10^400 is a rediculously large number. Even if you multiply the volume of the visible universe expressed in in cubic Planck lengths (1.4 e26 1.6x10^-36 m) by the age of the universe expressed in Planck times (5.4x10^-44 s) and the higher estimate for the number of particles in the universe (10^87) you get only 10^326, wich is much, much smaller than 10^400. It is impossible to handle this much data in the lifetime of the universe, whatever the technology. Even if a device would use every particle and every spacetime wrinkle in the universe in a big parallel quantum computer at a clock cycle of 10^44 hz. I do believe someone (something?) will eventually be able to build a program that beats any human. But solve go? Never. Dave - Oorspronkelijk bericht - Van: Chris Fant [EMAIL PROTECTED] Datum: vrijdag, januari 12, 2007 7:03 pm Onderwerp: Re: [computer-go] Can Go be solved???... PLEASE help! You neglected to consider the power of future quantum computers. On 1/12/07, Mark Boon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 12-jan-07, at 14:16, Chris Fant wrote: Plus, some would argue that any Go already is solved (write simple algorithm and wait 1 billion years while it runs). To 'solve' a game in the strict sense you need to know the best answer to every move. And you need to be able to prove that it's the best move. To do so you need to look at the following number of positions AMP^(AGL/2) where AMP is average number of moves in a position and AGL is the average game length. If I take a conservative AGL of 260 moves, we can compute the AMP from that, being (365+(365-AGL))/2=235 So we get 235^130, which is about 10^300 as a lower bound. The upper bound is something like 195^170 (play until all groups have 2 eyes) which my calculator is unable to compute, but I think it's roughly 10^400. I'm guessing it's questionable whether we'd be able to compute that even with a computer the size of this planet before the sun goes out. Distributing the work over other planets or star- sysems will only help marginally due to the time it takes to send information to Earth by the speed of light. So I'd say it's impossible. Mark ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Can Go be solved???... PLEASE help!
yeah, there are upper limits placed on computation rate by thermodynamics. 19x19 is way beyond those as Dave pointed out. But, even if you believe that technology will improve and the most revolutionary change yet will come to understanding of physics and that change will give us signifigantly more computational power and time etc... You can always make a bigger board. If life comes to a point where go could be solved for any size board, you will no longer be in this world and solving things such as is go solvable? will have no meaning. On 1/12/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And Mark Boon also neglected the future use of wormholes, replicators and who knows what? :) Sorry, but how do you what future quantum computers can churn so much data? 10^400 is a rediculously large number. Even if you multiply the volume of the visible universe expressed in in cubic Planck lengths (1.4 e26 1.6x10^-36 m) by the age of the universe expressed in Planck times (5.4x10^-44 s) and the higher estimate for the number of particles in the universe (10^87) you get only 10^326, wich is much, much smaller than 10^400. It is impossible to handle this much data in the lifetime of the universe, whatever the technology. Even if a device would use every particle and every spacetime wrinkle in the universe in a big parallel quantum computer at a clock cycle of 10^44 hz. I do believe someone (something?) will eventually be able to build a program that beats any human. But solve go? Never. Dave - Oorspronkelijk bericht - Van: Chris Fant [EMAIL PROTECTED] Datum: vrijdag, januari 12, 2007 7:03 pm Onderwerp: Re: [computer-go] Can Go be solved???... PLEASE help! You neglected to consider the power of future quantum computers. On 1/12/07, Mark Boon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 12-jan-07, at 14:16, Chris Fant wrote: Plus, some would argue that any Go already is solved (write simple algorithm and wait 1 billion years while it runs). To 'solve' a game in the strict sense you need to know the best answer to every move. And you need to be able to prove that it's the best move. To do so you need to look at the following number of positions AMP^(AGL/2) where AMP is average number of moves in a position and AGL is the average game length. If I take a conservative AGL of 260 moves, we can compute the AMP from that, being (365+(365-AGL))/2=235 So we get 235^130, which is about 10^300 as a lower bound. The upper bound is something like 195^170 (play until all groups have 2 eyes) which my calculator is unable to compute, but I think it's roughly 10^400. I'm guessing it's questionable whether we'd be able to compute that even with a computer the size of this planet before the sun goes out. Distributing the work over other planets or star- sysems will only help marginally due to the time it takes to send information to Earth by the speed of light. So I'd say it's impossible. Mark ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Can Go be solved???... PLEASE help!
Hi, On 1/12/07, Nick Apperson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: yeah, there are upper limits placed on computation rate by thermodynamics. 19x19 is way beyond those as Dave pointed out. But, even if you believe that technology will improve and the most revolutionary change yet will come to understanding of physics and that change will give us signifigantly more computational power and time etc... You can always make a bigger board. If life comes to a point where go could be solved for any size board, you will no longer be in this world and solving things such as is go solvable? will have no meaning. Well, if I may be excused for being way too pedantic on this topic, raw computing power isn't the only way. Mathematical solutions might easily reduce the search space just enough to allow a full search of what's left of it. On the other hand, I'm not worried. There will always be challenging games to play and to try to master. best regards, Vlad ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Can Go be solved???... PLEASE help!
I appreciate your response. Mathematical solutions are certainly a good possibility to reduce the amount of processing power needed. However, a person would not be able to solve 19x19 because a person lacks the necessary computational resources to form a solution in any reasonable amount of time. A computer would therefore have to solve go. I think this is as close to a possibility as we can get, but it isn't enough to solve go. And if somehow it ever is, make the board bigger... But, as I said, I think your comment is a good one and suggests a strategy for computer go that I think could be highly fruitful and I have been exploring. - Nick On 1/12/07, Vlad Dumitrescu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, On 1/12/07, Nick Apperson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: yeah, there are upper limits placed on computation rate by thermodynamics. 19x19 is way beyond those as Dave pointed out. But, even if you believe that technology will improve and the most revolutionary change yet will come to understanding of physics and that change will give us signifigantly more computational power and time etc... You can always make a bigger board. If life comes to a point where go could be solved for any size board, you will no longer be in this world and solving things such as is go solvable? will have no meaning. Well, if I may be excused for being way too pedantic on this topic, raw computing power isn't the only way. Mathematical solutions might easily reduce the search space just enough to allow a full search of what's left of it. On the other hand, I'm not worried. There will always be challenging games to play and to try to master. best regards, Vlad ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Can Go be solved???... PLEASE help!
Peter Drake wrote: There are a number of definitions of solved, ranging from a program exists that can beat any human to we can quickly determine, for any position, the best move and the result under optimal play. In the latter strong sense, I believe Go has only been solved up to 5x5, maybe 6x6. There are some games, such as Hex, for which we know who wins from the starting position given optimal play, but we don't know how to figure out the best move. Another interesting question would be the score (eg. territorry) that black/white can reach assuming perfect play on both sides. If we knew that, a perfectly fair komi could be calculated. From what I know, even chess is still unsolved conserning this matter - noone knows if white (or even black) can force a win. eph ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Can Go be solved???... PLEASE help!
White in 42 moves ;) Have a good weekend everyone. -Josh that, a perfectly fair komi could be calculated. From what I know, even chess is still unsolved conserning this matter - noone knows if white (or even black) can force a win. ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Can Go be solved???... PLEASE help!
I agree, anyone play othello/Reversi? From my understanding it has been solved. Yet when I try to find info on reversi computer tournaments they all seemed to die out several years ago. -Josh On 1/12/07, Chrilly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Besides the technical question if it is possible, there is the ethical/philosophical one if it should be done. I think solving a game is killing a game. ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Can Go be solved???... PLEASE help!
Another interesting question would be the score (eg. territorry) that black/white can reach assuming perfect play on both sides. If we knew that, a perfectly fair komi could be calculated. From what I know, even chess is still unsolved conserning this matter - noone knows if white (or even black) can force a win. eph Such a Komi would not be fairer than the current one. If a perfect player would win with 15 points. Should the komi be increased to 15 points, although humans can not realize this advantage and there would a much higher winning-rate for white? The most fair decisiion is that the Komi brings the winning chances in practical play as close to 50% as possible. One could compute the black advantage from a big games database and set then the Komi to the mean value. This is much simpler than solvint the game and also fairer than some theoretical limit which is irrelevant for human-human play. It would be interesting if the empirical Komi depends on the playing strength. I would assume,that the tempo of Black is worth more for strong players. But there is on the other side the law of the balance of stupity. Also white loosed due too his lack of skills tempo/sente and the net effect is for all playing levels the same. Monte-Carlo Go is based on this law. Chrilly ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Can Go be solved???... PLEASE help!
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], wrote: Sorry, but how do you what future quantum computers can churn so much data? Chris Fant isn't a modern-day human but an android sent back through a wormhole from future times (Future ^2, Left **7, Right **.13, to the root of SQRT(-1) in hex coords). But he'll self-destruct before admitting such, so lines of questioning like this will yield, at best, an uninteresting silence. Ooops, I've said too much. Boom -- Aidan Karley, Aberdeen, Scotland Written at Fri, 12 Jan 2007 21:40 GMT, but posted later. ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Can Go be solved???... PLEASE help!
On Fri, 2007-01-12 at 15:43 -0600, Nick Apperson wrote: yeah, there are upper limits placed on computation rate by thermodynamics. 19x19 is way beyond those as Dave pointed out. But, even if you believe that technology will improve and the most revolutionary change yet will come to understanding of physics and that change will give us signifigantly more computational power and time etc... You can always make a bigger board. If life comes to a point where go could be solved for any size board, you will no longer be in this world and solving things such as is go solvable? will have no meaning. Yes, you can always make a bigger problem by making a bigger go board but that doesn't change the theoretical properties of the game. The game will always be solvable. The game might be trivially solvable even now to a being not confined to our 3 physical dimensions. I hate to get philosophical like this, but there are theories of other dimensions that (if true) say we live in a multi-dimensional universe.There may be much more here than we can sense and that we can perhaps take advantage of. But it doesn't matter. When Chris said 1 billion years you should have instantly realized that he didn't mean this literally, he just meant a correct procedure exists for solving the game. Since no one has proved how long the universe will last, I don't think you can even prove that in a practical sense it's unsolvable. If you lack imagination you can simply say it's not solvable because you believe it can't be done in your lifetime - as if science and math cares about how long we live or even the universe.If the universe will die in 10 trillion years does that mean the number 20 trillion is an impossible number? The concept of infinity is important in mathematics. It's even useful, but I suppose that it really should be considered meaningless since we all die after 70 or 80 years. - Don ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
Re: [computer-go] Can Go be solved???... PLEASE help!
On Fri, 2007-01-12 at 21:51 +, Vlad Dumitrescu wrote: Hi, On 1/12/07, Nick Apperson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: yeah, there are upper limits placed on computation rate by thermodynamics. 19x19 is way beyond those as Dave pointed out. But, even if you believe that technology will improve and the most revolutionary change yet will come to understanding of physics and that change will give us signifigantly more computational power and time etc... You can always make a bigger board. If life comes to a point where go could be solved for any size board, you will no longer be in this world and solving things such as is go solvable? will have no meaning. Well, if I may be excused for being way too pedantic on this topic, raw computing power isn't the only way. Mathematical solutions might easily reduce the search space just enough to allow a full search of what's left of it. Finally. A sensible voice of reason! - Don On the other hand, I'm not worried. There will always be challenging games to play and to try to master. best regards, Vlad ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
RE: [computer-go] reign of terror
It looks like most of these games are being won in the opening. Doesn't mogo have a big UCT opening book? Is it learning from each game it plays as well? David -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Don Dailey Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 6:41 PM To: computer-go Subject: [computer-go] reign of terror Someone needs to get their bot on CGOS and end Mogo's reign of terror. A version of MoGo has achieved a CGOS rating of well over 2300! - Don ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ ___ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
