Xref: utzoo rec.games.go:947 comp.ai:3980 rec.games.board:2060
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!agate!bionet!ames!lll-winken!uunet!ccicpg!cci632!jf
From: jf@cci632.UUCP (Jens Fiederer)
Newsgroups: rec.games.go,comp.ai,rec.games.board
Subject: Re: Computer Go Challenge
Keywords: go, computer games, ai
Message-ID: <28044@cci632.UUCP>
Date: 21 Apr 89 17:08:40 GMT
References: <3724@sdsu.UUCP> <100234@sun.Eng.Sun.COM>
Reply-To: jf@ccird3.UUCP (Jens Fiederer)
Organization: CCI, Communications Systems Division, Rochester, NY
Lines: 18

In article <100234@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> landman@sun.UUCP (Howard A. Landman) writes:
>On the other hand, some studies of my pro game database indicate that pros
>routinely make hundreds of points of errors per game; so the possibility
>that a program might someday beat them is quite real.  And the exploding
>development of a solid mathematical theory of the endgame, based on Conway
>and Berlekamp's work, promises programs that play rapid and accurate yose.
>It's a very exciting time in computer Go this year.
>
>	Howard A. Landman
>	landman@hanami.sun.com

Apparently, at least one pro disagrees: Kato Masao has stated (boasted?)
that God (to avoid religious disagreements here, assume that hypothetical
entity/process that makes no mistakes at Go could give him ONE handicap
stone  That would put the figure for Kato at about 10 points of errors
per game.  Is Kato lying, or are the other pros really that much worse?

Jens