[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [gnugo-devel] (no subject)

From: Gunnar Farneback
Subject: Re: [gnugo-devel] (no subject)
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 23:01:56 +0100
User-agent: EMH/1.14.1 SEMI/1.14.3 (Ushinoya) FLIM/1.14.2 (Yagi-Nishiguchi) APEL/10.3 Emacs/20.7 (sparc-sun-solaris2.7) (with unibyte mode)

Inge wrote:
> The problem is that S5 should not be amalgamated with Q7.  First, it
> destroys GNU Gos idea of who has territory where, and second it
> destroys the notion of what has to be defended.

Over-amalgamation is always a problem when it happens.

> The cause of all this is that the information from atari_atari is not
> used in the dragon analysis.  But this is a chicken and egg problem:
> Atari_atari uses information about dragons and dragon statuses in
> compute_aa_status() and the dragon analysis should use information
> from atari_atari.

A connection reader should be able to see that there's no way to
connect S5 and Q7. The amalgamation code may need help from a
combination module too, but connection reading must be the corner
stone in the future.

> The question is: Is there a better way to solve it?  Another, more
> general, way would be to make amalgamation a revertible operation.
> When we find information later in the process, we could split dragons
> into smaller sub dragons.  The more advanced owl module is one example
> of a module that could provide information that would make such a step
> necessary: "we can live, but we lose a tail in the process".

Splitting dragons after amalgamation is hopelessly complex. It may be
a better idea to introduce a new type of unit between worm and dragon.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]