I think a computer would play this variant well if k was small. To make the move generation consistent, the first move should be played as if there was a previous move to the center perhaps.
Ladders would probably still be an issue. - Don On Tue, 2008-11-18 at 23:20 +0100, "Ingo Althöfer" wrote: > Hello, > > one of the basic problems of go newbies > is their tendency to place the next stone > near to the latest stone of the opponent. > Sometimes this is called the "2-inch heuristic > of beginners". > > What do you think about a formalized variant > of Go with one-sided distance-k rule? > > > Let k be some natural number. > > The normal rules of Go hold, except for one thing: > > When possible, White has to place his next stone > > within distance k (in city-block metric) of the latest > > stone of Black. If there is no feasible move of this type > > the stone has to be placed within the smallest > > possible city-block distance of the latest stone of > > Black. White may pass at any time. Example: > > On 19x19 board k=36 would mean no restriction at all.) > > * What should be fair values of komi(k) or fair numbers > of handicap stones? > > * Main question: How strong would MCTS-based programs be in this variant(s)? > > * Would computers be stronger than humans for certain values of k? > > Ingo. >
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
