Life In 19x19 http://lifein19x19.com/ |
|
Think and Grow Old http://lifein19x19.com/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=15854 |
Page 3 of 4 |
Author: | Bill Spight [ Thu Jul 26, 2018 5:22 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Think and Grow Old |
Start by evaluating positions, not plays. The latter evaluations follow from the former. |
Author: | Tryss [ Thu Jul 26, 2018 5:47 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Think and Grow Old |
Author: | EdLee [ Thu Jul 26, 2018 6:11 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
Hi Tryss, Bill, Thanks. |
Author: | Bill Spight [ Thu Jul 26, 2018 8:18 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Think and Grow Old |
On the value of "c" (Hidden for convenience.) |
Author: | EdLee [ Thu Jul 26, 2018 10:03 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
Hi Bill, Tryss, |
Author: | Bill Spight [ Thu Jul 26, 2018 11:25 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: |
Author: | jlt [ Fri Jul 27, 2018 1:18 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Think and Grow Old |
@Ed, Bill, Tryss: |
Author: | Bill Spight [ Fri Jul 27, 2018 1:40 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Think and Grow Old |
Author: | EdLee [ Fri Jul 27, 2018 1:58 am ] |
Post subject: | |
Hi jlt, |
Author: | Tryss [ Fri Jul 27, 2018 2:31 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: |
EdLee wrote: Hi jlt, |
Author: | EdLee [ Fri Jul 27, 2018 4:30 am ] |
Post subject: | |
Hi Tryss, |
Author: | Bill Spight [ Fri Jul 27, 2018 8:27 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: |
EdLee wrote: Hi Tryss, You may have noticed that I did not assume that White's territory was negative in these notes. I did assume that the stones surrounding the corridor are alive. |
Author: | Bill Spight [ Fri Jul 27, 2018 8:29 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Think and Grow Old |
@ Tami This discussion has grown quite a bit. I didn't mean to hijack your thread. If you'd like, we can move this discussion elsewhere. |
Author: | Tami [ Fri Jul 27, 2018 1:56 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Think and Grow Old |
Bill Spight wrote: @ Tami This discussion has grown quite a bit. I didn't mean to hijack your thread. If you'd like, we can move this discussion elsewhere. I don't mind. It was my own fault for asking the question I'm just trying to make sense of your reply, mathematics not being my thing. Thank you very much for taking the time. It might take me some time to understand fully. |
Author: | Bill Spight [ Fri Jul 27, 2018 2:31 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Think and Grow Old |
Tami wrote: Bill Spight wrote: @ Tami This discussion has grown quite a bit. I didn't mean to hijack your thread. If you'd like, we can move this discussion elsewhere. I don't mind. It was my own fault for asking the question I'm just trying to make sense of your reply, mathematics not being my thing. Thank you very much for taking the time. It might take me some time to understand fully. Thanks. The math is easy: count, add, subtract, divide by 2. The first example is about gote. Next comes sente, and that's it. |
Author: | jlt [ Fri Jul 27, 2018 10:07 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Think and Grow Old |
@Bill, |
Author: | Bill Spight [ Sat Jul 28, 2018 2:05 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Think and Grow Old |
I'm off to bed soon, but let me just make a quick clarification or two. First, the evaluation of go positions and plays does not produce a general theory of the endgame. Far from it. But it is a good place to start your analysis. Doing so gives you information that will usually tell you where to play. But not always. Second, you can use probabilities to understand this kind of evaluation. The go books do not teach that, and it is not necessary, but it is one way of looking at it. You can think of the value of a position as a kind of expected value. But you can also think of finding the average value of a position as a form of defuzzification. Historically, however, go players figured out how to evaluate positions and plays without reference to either probability or fuzzy logic. Third, you can view the evaluation of go positions in minimax terms. I redefined go evaluation in such terms 20 years ago in my paper on the evaluation of multiple kos, which I presented at a computers and games conference in Japan. But that definition depends upon concepts that you do not need for these evaluations. That definition is algebraic. As I mentioned to Tami, all we need here is arithmetic. In any event, we do not need to know perfect play in any sense to evaluate positions. We can use every possible line of play in a position, alternating or not. For instance, instead of playing first at the mouth of a corridor, we could start at the other end. We would then eliminate such lines of play from consideration. It makes our job easier if we know that they are wrong in the first place, but it is not necessary. We can use evaluation to find lines of play that are in some sense, correct. We do not have to assume perfect play. |
Author: | Elom [ Sat Jul 28, 2018 3:03 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Think and Grow Old |
Author: | jlt [ Sat Jul 28, 2018 4:11 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Think and Grow Old |
@Bill: I am still under the impression that using minimax is equivalent to assuming perfect play, but let's not worry too much about that minor point. I am more interested in what you have in mind about sente; so far we only had gote examples. |
Author: | EdLee [ Sat Jul 28, 2018 10:26 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
Hi Bill, |
Page 3 of 4 | All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ] |
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |