Re: [gnugo-devel] Re: some answers and ask for help

[Xavier Combelle]

David G Doshay wrote:

> I just wanted to point out that the endgame is where I have
> found the greatest number of bugs in SlugGo, when SlugGo
> makes mistakes that the underlying GNU Go does not. 

That is really strange, can you send us som sgf to understand the problem,
with the number of move you notice the problem

> So, I
> do think that it would be a very good exercise for Eric to start
> on the endgame, particularly considering that he says that
> he is not that strong a player. The endgame is far easier
> to understand than the interaction of strategy and tactics
> in the middle game.

I fully agrree with you.Anythinig would be welcome.
Moreover, good endgame is necessary to have a good evaluation
of the situation.

> But then again, I have no idea what an AI Planner is or how
> it works. I think in terms of algorithms and data structures.

I really don't know neither, but if I understood well a planner is something
wich help to organize tasks, the more urgent first.

But what I was speaking about was the underlying theory that Eric used.
It appears that by making a highlevel strategy (for exemple what sluggo 
does)
and low level tactic (what gnugo is apparently) communicating
together in both directions you have a better results than if the strategic
module just use the results of the tactic.

My problem just now is that neither Eric Parker nor you did present what 
they want
to do with their programs. Do you want to sell it, give it to the FSF, 
or just use
it as a research purpose and keep it for you ? As you both communicate 
on the gnugo mailing list,
it's a very strange situation.

Xavier