[computer-go] Situational super KO?

[Erik van der Werf]

On 3/7/07, Harri Salakoski <harri.salakoski at elisanet.fi> wrote:
>
>
> Hi
> As reading
> http://www.cs.unimaas.nl/~vanderwerf/pubdown/solving_go_on_sm
all_boards.pdf
> don't understand chapter 5.1. Following 3*3 go game.

Maybe you were not actually reading the above link, but chapter 5 of my
thesis? The thesis contains more info, so that's fine, but then it's better
to use that as reference.

All can be found at http://erikvanderwerf.tengen.nl/publications.html

>
> -A2
> eee
> bee
> eee

Don't like your formatting :-(


...
#..
...

> -B2

...
#O.
...

> -B1
...
#O.
.#.

> -C3 - can be bad move according chapter 5.1

Subtle details in the rules can occasionally make a huge difference.

..O
#O.
.#.

> -B3? - don't understand how black wins using this move(a in diagram 10)
.#O
#O.
.#.

> -A3
O.O
#O.
.#.

> -C2
O.O
#O#
.#.

!!! situation: white to move, no consecutive passes, no point illegal due to
basic ko !!!

> -A1
O.O
.O#
O#.

> -B3
O#.
.O#
O#.

> -C1

O#.
.O#
O.O

> -A2
.#.
#O#
O.O

> -C3
.#O
#O.
O.O

> -B1
.#O
#O.
.#O

> -A3
O.O
#O.
.#O



>
> And now black has no legal moves as position repeats?
> at least my test code says so.

Move at C2

O.O
#O#
.#.


situation: white to move, no consecutive passes, C1 Illegal due to basic ko


>
> Somebody could enlight me what I have misunderstanded chapter 5.1.

The situation is different. For details see section 2.2.1 and appendix A of
the thesis, or the section about the rules in the ICGA article.

Erik
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://computer-go.org/pipermail/computer-go/attachments/20070307/3a39fb5a/attachment.htm