Hi YKY :) As for Tic Tac Toe, I believe this should work: write a winning strategy in any functional language (being lambda calculus based). Then convert it to logic rules by Curry-Howard correspondence. And voilà, you have a logic representation of the winning strategy.
Other than Curry-Howard, from what I learned, logic represents a Turing complete language, just use implication as a function symbol, and manage variables in related predicates. We start from axioms (progressively asserted Tic Tac Toe moves) that are raw material taken for granted, from which all the conclusions in planing are deduced. When you check all the branching conclusions, asserting all the possible opponent moves in between, if you encounter a "win" combination, there could be a potential path for winning if the opponent moves as predicted. This should work for any system, including the Tic Tac Toe game. But beware, there could be an infinite loop in rules, just like in regular programming, and it happens on recursive implication. This could be avoided by tracking the recursion count, rejecting high count branches. For Tic Tac Toe, just find a way to represent a board as a predicate system (maybe one 9 parameters long, or three 3 parameters long, or whatever else fits), define all the winning combinations, and that is half a job done. ------------------------------------------ Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI Permalink: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T74958068c4e0a30f-Mad2009e132c0980dda5990c7 Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription
