Author: Jason Williamson
Date: 14:29:05 11/06/01
Go up one level in this thread
On November 06, 2001 at 16:30:55, Angrim wrote: >On November 05, 2001 at 16:48:25, Jason Williamson wrote: > >>On November 05, 2001 at 16:01:01, Angrim wrote: >> >>>On November 05, 2001 at 04:35:44, Jason Williamson wrote: >>> >>>>and with Go Software being weaker then the avg competive player (I am about 8 >>>>Kyu on the IGS, and I can give Many Faces of Go (the world champ AFAIK) 6 >>>>stones) there is lots of room to improve and innovate. >>>> >>>>I wonder if some of you chess computer genius types took the time to learn Go >>>>how well you would do. :D >>> >>>I thought that GO would be an interesting game to write a player for, >>>so a few years ago I started looking for the rules to it and some >>>basic strategy information. I gave up. I think that most other >>>computer chess programers will have the same problem, we like a game >>>that has simple and well defined rules, and which then uses these >>>simple rules to make an interesting game. >>> >>>Until I have rules which specify the following three things for GO, >>>there is no chance that I will try to code for it. >>>1. given a board position, which moves are legal. >>>2. when is the game over. and "when both players agree that it is over" does >>> NOT work for me. >>>3. once the game is over, what is the score. And any rule which includes >>> the other player having to agree that a stone is dead is junk. I >>> need a way for my program to determine for itself what the score is! >>> >>>Oh, and if the specified rules only apply to games played in >>>one specific country, I won't be really happy with them. It seems >>>that most oriental countries have a few slight modifications they >>>have made to the rules, and stick to them as a matter of national pride. >>> >>>End rant, >>>Angrim >>> >>>>JW >> >> >>Actually all your points have been delt with. >> >>1. In any given position, the only moves that are not legal are moves that: >>Instantly repeat a position (capturing a Ko), or put a stone or group of stones >>in to a situation where they have no liberties and are instantly captured. >> >>All other moves are legal. > >legality of "suicide" moves varies by country. >definition of repeating a position varies by ruleset also, some use simple >Ko which is repeating a position that occured 2 ply ago, some >use "super" Ko which is repeating a position no matter how far back it was. > >> >>2. Ultimatly the game is over when it is not possible to make a legal move. Go >>programs today do know how to end a game, though. They know to some degree that >>terriotories are uninvadable after a certain point and know when to pass. > >True, if neither side has a legal move the game is over. I have never seen >a game reach such a position, but in theory :) >I expect that there is usually a point long before such a position is reached >where it is no longer to either sides advantage to move, and this tends >to end the game. > >>3. Counting is simple, and there programs out there that do it fairly well as >>well. Many Faces of Go, while fairly weak, IS stronger then most beginners. :D > >simple eh? which rule set is this? >Not saying that it is impossible for a program to do, but I have >not been happy with any description of how to score a board that >I have seen actually used. > >Angrim Also the rules are a little more standardized now, with the Internet and such. The most prevalent rule set is the Japanese one. Well, of course in theory a position could be reached where no legal moves are allowed, but yes, in practice it becomes impossible to make living groups in small spaces. With a bit of knowledge put into the engine, you could determine that said space is too small to make it possibile and therefore have it pass. As to counting, well, the Japanese system is quite simple. Take of prisioners, put em in the enemy territory, 1..2..3..4..5.. hehe Now the Ing and Chinese systems are a bit tricky, but in pratice might actually be easier for computer to do. How do you determine if a group is alive or dead? Eyes of course, but you have to be careful that your program isn't fooled by false eyes. :)
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.