It would get it eventually, which means this doesn't inhibit scalability.
I don't expect every aspect of a program to improve at the same rate - but if a program is "properly" scalable, you can expect that it doesn't regress with extra time. It only moves forward, gets stronger with more thinking time. You might complain about a glaring weakness, but even that weakness doesn't get worse, it gets better. Some aspects of it's play by improve more quickly than others by our perceptions. Having said that, I am interested in this. Is there something that totally prevents the program from EVER seeing the best move? I don't mean something that takes a long time, I mean something that has the theoretical property that it's impossible to every find the best move, even given eternity? I believe this is possible based on an interaction of the pass rules and the eye rule in the play-outs, but I'm not a very strong go player so I would have to think about it. - Don Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: > Don Dailey wrote: > >> So I think this is nakade. > > Yes. Leela 0.2.x would get it wrong [1]. > > [1] Not eternally, but it would still take unreasonably long. > _______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
