2006/11/19, Mark Boon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On 17-nov-06, at 07:15, Eduardo Sabbatella wrote: > Shouldn't base the entire game play on the last move. > > But looking at the last move could be an excellent > search optimisation. Indeed, I think any serious Go > program "should" look closer at the last move. ;-) > I think most of you approach the idea of proximity to the last move from the wrong angle. The concept to consider is stability of a position, not proximity in a spatial sense. Proximity is only a side- effect of an unstable situation in that a local answer is needed to make the position stable again. Statistically this is often an answer near the last move, but often it's also near the last move in the sense for example that the move defends a group next to the last move that was threatened by it.
I think you are right, but proximity is easy and fast to implement while stability is very difficult. If a program knows about stability, it understands Go (life and death, shape, tesuji etc.). I think proximity is a good and fast heuristic to get candidate moves. Andrés Domínguez
_______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list [email protected] http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
