[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [gnugo-devel] endgame tuning
From: |
Gunnar Farnebäck |
Subject: |
Re: [gnugo-devel] endgame tuning |
Date: |
Fri, 10 Sep 2004 03:02:12 +0200 |
User-agent: |
EMH/1.14.1 SEMI/1.14.3 (Ushinoya) FLIM/1.14.2 (Yagi-Nishiguchi) APEL/10.3 Emacs/21.3 (sparc-sun-solaris2.9) MULE/5.0 (SAKAKI) |
Evan wrote:
> > > +
> > > +?OO
> > > +a..
> > > +O*X
> > > +
> > > +;xmoyo(a)
> >
> > But this constraint can't be right. Should be omoyo(a).
>
> Oops. I wonder why it worked, then.
Did it? You didn't report endgame:920 as solved by your patch.
> In general, I think that if all the move does is pull a stone out of
> atari, the shape considerations are relatively irrelevant compared to
> the value of the groups directly involved. If it is a tactical
> defense and there are other liberties, then shape may well still be
> relevant. Of course, I could be wrong about all that, but that was
> the logic behind the change.
I would say that giving the shape bonus is questionable in all cases
for this pattern but pulling out a string in atari often deprives the
opponent of easy eye space. Actually a tactically captured string with
remaining liberties might even have a fair bit of aji, so it could be
argued that it's more important to draw out a string in atari than one
with liberties. I guess the bottom line is that I can accept reducing
or removing the shape bonus overall but that I don't see a strong case
for differentiating with respect to liberties.
/Gunnar
Re: [gnugo-devel] endgame tuning, Gunnar Farnebäck, 2004/09/08