I have written commentaries on positional judgements of the games, see
usenet
<176jdb1f33rlnlm1nnrmo1g3g5nme16...@4ax.com>
<vrhndb1juu1dof00dmdo6pukgrl0m2c...@4ax.com>
or web
http://www.lifein19x19.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=12766
http://www.lifein19x19.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=12771
alternative
http://www.dgob.de/yabbse/index.php?topic=5977.0
http://www.dgob.de/yabbse/index.php?topic=5978.0
***
Conclusion: AlphaGo's implicit positional judgement is on average better
than the judgement of weak professionals. It is an open question whether
AlphaGo judges huge spheres of dominating influence correctly because
its skill in reducing them as at least strong amateur dan level, but
probably pro level. Implicitly, the program complies with the best
available explicit human theory when reducing a big moyo. This includes
model short-term use of aji in all the moyo's boundaries. Possibly with
the exception of the huge sphere of dominating influence, AlphaGo also
makes good move choices when it must play an influence stone and greatly
alter the influence balance. IMO, Lee needs to take advantage of whole
board, long-term interaction or take sufficient advantage of the
program's revealed strategic mistakes to demonstrate AlphaGo's limits.
--
robert jasiek
_______________________________________________
Computer-go mailing list
Computer-go@computer-go.org
http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
