It is currently Fri Oct 19, 2018 1:43 am

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 23 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Good territory scoring rules for training computers?
Post #21 Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2017 9:49 am 
Judan

Posts: 7756
Liked others: 2112
Was liked: 2720
@moha

I would like to reply without going comment by comment.

Traditionally, for centuries if not millennia, the game ended by agreement, not by passes, and dame were typically left unfilled. There were no written rules until relatively recently. Humans can handle that, with rare exceptions. But then you got the Segoe-Takahashi dispute, where the players did not reach agreement. But it was hardly because they were unfamiliar with 10,000 year kos. The root cause was the failure to reach agreement, the ko was just the pretext. (Nihon Kiin politics was also involved.)

How do you end the game without agreement? As rules became codified, the answer across the go world seems to be by passes. One of the first set of rules to be proposed, by Yasunaga Hajime, ended play by three consecutive passes. Most rules today end play by two consecutive passes. Ing rules require four passes, but few amateurs know why. It is because resumption of play in the encore after two passes starts with no ko bans. Similarly, the hypothetical encore in Japanese rules starts with no ko bans, and only hypothetical passes can lift ko bans. You and I may think that it is better just to have passes lift ko bans in the first phase, but we are in a small minority. ;)

Another thing has happened with the adoption of written rules is that disputes are resolved by play, actual or hypothetical, and not by appeal to the opinion of a top play or players. And that means encores, actual or hypothetical. Unless some mistake has been made, actual encores occur below temperature 0 by territory scoring. The J89 rules avoid that, because hypothetical play addresses only questions of the life and death of stones. But the traditional ruling about Three Points Without Capturing makes perfect sense by play at temperature -1. If the Japanese rules allowed actual play at temperature -1, however, then a player might score a point by filling a false eye in a seki, thus violating the idea that there are no points in seki. Something had to give, and it was Three Points.

I get the impression that you would be happy to return to the days of the Japanese '49 rules, where games ended by agreement, dame were not played out, and disputes were rare. I probably would, too. (OTOH, ancient territory rules with a group tax are attractive, too. ;)) But those days are gone, and we seem to be stuck with encores, actual or hypothetical, which determine the final results.

_________________
The Adkins Principle:

At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?

— Winona Adkins

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Good territory scoring rules for training computers?
Post #22 Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2017 7:39 pm 
Lives with ko

Posts: 190
Liked others: 0
Was liked: 15
Rank: 2d
Thanks for nice summary again. :) For ending, I'm confident my tiny suggestion itself would not cause trouble. After first two passes, either agreement (99.9%), or play resumes first, without significant rules changes. There can be complications after this 2nd phase, but these are the same without it and can be dealt with as before. But there is no need to pollute the first phase, the main game itself, neither with dame fill, nor extra rules or special moves. (With territory scoring not even extra ko rules are necessary, beyond the simple ko rule.)
Bill Spight wrote:
the traditional ruling about Three Points Without Capturing makes perfect sense by play at temperature -1. If the Japanese rules allowed actual play at temperature -1, however, then a player might score a point by filling a false eye in a seki, thus violating the idea that there are no points in seki. Something had to give, and it was Three Points.

I get the impression that you would be happy to return to the days of the Japanese '49 rules, where games ended by agreement, dame were not played out, and disputes were rare.
I like (two) passes, with no dame play. And I think the '89 rules are a significant improvement over '49. At least the logic is clear now: only completely clean captures are granted for free. OC, the exact procedure to determine what is a clean capture is up to debate, but this is a minor detail. (For human games it seems best to have two rules variants/options, one with hypothetical play after 2nd phase, the other with transition to area scored encores.) But if the first phase can - and it can! - be left untouched, no ruleset should go against this - and the 99.9%.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Good territory scoring rules for training computers?
Post #23 Posted: Mon Dec 18, 2017 12:05 am 
Tengen

Posts: 4674
Liked others: 0
Was liked: 629
moha wrote:
the '89 rules are a significant improvement over '49. At least the logic is clear now: only completely clean captures are granted for free. OC, the exact procedure to determine what is a clean capture is up to debate, but this is a minor detail.


The logic of the Japanese 1989 is clear now? The exact procedure is just a minor detail? Uhm. It is (almost) clear thanks to my 10 years of preliminary study of the Japanese 1989 Rules and 11 months of full time research resulting in the Japanese 2003 Rules and commentary on the Japanese 1989 Rules both explaining them clearly. However, the explanation is the opposite of a minor detail as it also contains a definition of strategy and a conceptual definition of life and death and paved the way to my definition of generalised ko.

http://home.snafu.de/jasiek/j2003.html
http://home.snafu.de/jasiek/j1989c.html
http://home.snafu.de/jasiek/ko.pdf

Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 23 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group