I came across this on slashdot today.
Could this be used in Go programming for identifying strong structures.
Quote from slashdot:
Jeff Hawkins is best known for founding Palm Computing and
Handspring, but for the last eighteen months he's been working on his
third company, Numenta. In his 2005
On 3/7/07, Harri Salakoski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi
As reading
http://www.cs.unimaas.nl/~vanderwerf/pubdown/solving_go_on_sm
all_boards.pdf
don't understand chapter 5.1. Following 3*3 go game.
Maybe you were not actually reading the above link, but chapter 5 of my
thesis? The thesis
Thanks for detailed explanation, so first similar looking black position has no
ko and next has.
t. harri
- Original Message -
From: Erik van der Werf
To: computer-go
Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2007 10:46 PM
Subject: Re: [computer-go] Situational super KO?
On 3/7/07,
Paul wrote (on the computer-go list):
About asynchronous move generation.
I'd propose something like this. Add some form for asynchronous
responses. E.g. '=[id] ...' means success, '?[id] ...' means error
(this is as now) and '%[id] ...' means asynchronous response. Maybe
for
Gunnar Farneback wrote:
Example 3: Like example 2, but abort command comes too late.
Controller:
1 async_genmove black
2 abort_async_genmove
3 play black C3
Engine:
=1
!1 E5
=2
=3
Maybe it should then read
?2 not in progress
It also makes sense to forbid an async_genmove (or
Don Dailey wrote:
On Wed, 2007-03-07 at 22:53 +0100, Gunnar Farneback wrote:
* To abort the asynchronous genmove, the controller should send the
(synchronous) command abort_async_genmove. If the engine has not
returned the asynchronous genmove response before responding to the
abort
First, a general hypothesis on heuristics: one should apply
heuristics to the first few moves beyond the fringe of the UCT tree,
and not later. It's important that these early moves be good, but not
worth the time to make later moves good. Thoughts? Is anyone already
using this idea?
