[Computer-go] longest 3x3 game
pasky at ucw.cz
Sun Feb 21 12:09:35 PST 2016
On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 09:00:54PM +0100, Petr Baudis wrote:
> I'm wondering if there's some framework for studying combinatoric
> aspects of games that are not only technically Go, but also actually
> resemble real Go games played by competent players?
> This research doesn't touch my heart very deeply because it seems
> that the astonishing numbers rise up only while exploiting "loopholes"
> in the technical rules formulation rather than their intention - passing
> while you still have moves that'd improve your score, putting
> whole-board groups in self-atari instead of capturing enemy groups
> in atari, etc.
> How would the results change if we approximated more realistic games
> by introducing just the same basic restriction that we use in Monte
> Carlo simulations - (i) filling your own true eye is invalid move,
> (ii) do not pass if a move is avilable.
Maybe a more formal way to express my concern: it should be easy to
come up with (of course ugly or expensive to verify) rule modifications
that would still allow >99.9% or more pro games to be valid, but
invalidate games proving these results in just a few moves. Can we
reach some results (re longest games, number of games, etc.) that
don't have this property?
If you have good ideas, good data and fast computers,
you can do almost anything. -- Geoffrey Hinton
More information about the Computer-go