3 ms·

I wouldn't say scoring is trivial -- it depends on both players agreeing which stones are alive or dead. Experienced Go players "just get it" but computers don'

• rockdoe 12y ago
  Scoring is trivial - if the game is actually finished. No human wants to play go games to the finish so essentially all human games are scored by agreement. But a Monte Carlo program just simulates the game vs itself. See the addenum to my post above.
  • howeman 12y ago
    I don't know what you mean by "the game is actually finished". AGA Rules: 9) Ending the Game: Two consecutive passes signal the end of the game. New Zealand rules: The game is finished when both players agree that there are no more worthwhile moves.
    • rockdoe 12y ago
      Those rulesets weren't written by mathematicians. What do they say about life & death disputes while scoring "after the game has ended"? I'm going to guess: Resume the game. Humans agreeing on a score and outcome has little to do with what a program has to do to calculate this score.
      • howeman 12y ago
        It's complicated. Most rulesets (AGA, New Zealand, I believe chinese) say "resume the game". The Japanese ruleset is a lot more complicated. I still don't see your argument. Humans and humans are capable of agreeing on a score with those rulesets. Computers are also capable of following the ruleset and agreeing on the score. Computer vs. human games are not playing by a different ruleset. By that ruleset, the game is over when both sides pass.
• deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]