homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.205.254.108
register, free tools, login, search, pro membership, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Pubcon Platinum Sponsor 2014
Home / Forums Index / Local / Foo
Forum Library, Charter, Moderators: incrediBILL & lawman

Foo Forum

    
Game of Go. computers can't win
wetware still beats hardware
tangor




msg:4672166
 6:13 am on May 19, 2014 (gmt 0)

Invented over 2500 years ago in China, Go is a pastime beloved by emperors and generals, intellectuals and child prodigies. Like chess, itís a deterministic perfect information game ó a game where no information is hidden from either player, and there are no built-in elements of chance, such as dice.1 And like chess, itís a two-person war game. Play begins with an empty board, where players alternate the placement of black and white stones, attempting to surround territory while avoiding capture by the enemy. That may seem simpler than chess, but itís not. When Deep Blue was busy beating Kasparov, the best Go programs couldnít even challenge a decent amateur. And despite huge computing advances in the years since ó Kasparov would probably lose to your home computer ó the automation of expert-level Go remains one of AIís greatest unsolved riddles.

[wired.com...]
While this is a very lengthy article, the takeaway is in the para above. Grand fun, insights into game design, etc. And that's why this is FOO.

 

lucy24




msg:4672168
 6:47 am on May 19, 2014 (gmt 0)

That may seem simpler than chess, but itís not.

Sigh. Another in the long list of people who don't understand the difference between "simple" and "easy" :(

graeme_p




msg:4672175
 7:02 am on May 19, 2014 (gmt 0)

Also, what is simple to a computer is very different from what is simple to a human.

Chess algorithms do far more exhaustive searches of future moves than human players, but Go branches more rapidly (i.e. there are more possible moves on each turn) so exhaustive searches are harder. Computerised turn based strategy games are often similar because of the large boards and numbers of pieces, most traditional board games are not, because they were designed for physically small boards.

lucy24




msg:4672200
 9:56 am on May 19, 2014 (gmt 0)

And then there's Life, which optimally runs on an infinite "board" ...
†X
XXX
X

(Did I get that right? I used to have it on a screen saver, but that was many operating systems ago.)

:: detour to search engine ::

Yes! [pmav.eu] That's the one I meant.

londrum




msg:4672201
 10:08 am on May 19, 2014 (gmt 0)

they will beat us at Go eventually, but at least there will always be Twister... let's see them boxes of lights and wires try and beat us at that

tbear




msg:4672358
 6:07 pm on May 19, 2014 (gmt 0)

I can always beat my computer at Jiu Jitsu! ;D

lucy24




msg:4673385
 7:24 am on May 22, 2014 (gmt 0)

Please don't say there's a rule against this:

[xkcd.com...]

:)

Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  
 

Home / Forums Index / Local / Foo
rss feed

All trademarks and copyrights held by respective owners. Member comments are owned by the poster.
Home ¦ Free Tools ¦ Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About ¦ Library ¦ Newsletter
WebmasterWorld is a Developer Shed Community owned by Jim Boykin.
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved