Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Othello Is Solved?

arxiv.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 285 posts

Re: Othello Is Solved?

#201

Post by bluecalm »

coldtea wrote: post #190
bluecalm wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah but this is not very useful concept in practical play and that was the context of my comment. Chess is at different stage today than it was a few years ago. The difference is that no matter what resources and how much time your opponent have they will not beat you as long as you remember the line shown by your home PC. I call it "weakly solved in practice" because it's exactly that: our (chess players) reality t…

> Yeah but this is not very useful concept in practical play and that was the context of my comment. This depends on whether the solution can be "memorized" so to speak. For games where it can, it makes playing meaningless.

Obviously. The point is that in interesting games (for example chess) the solution can't be memorized but parts of it can. The point is that in chess we have a solution as good as the mathematical one today (for all practical purposes). It's an interesting point because it matters for practical players - you're no longer afraid your opponent or their team can find "holes" (that is weak moves) in your preparation. You're now only afraid they will play moves you didn't expect.

Re: Othello Is Solved?

#202

Post by CyberDildonics »

Tao3300 wrote: post #197
CyberDildonics wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Implementing these rules can give you a fairly decent opponent and it's interesting to see how quickly people will ascribe "intelligence" to something that is very simple. Who is actually "ascribing intelligence" to this? Othello has been on $10 LCD games that take double AA batteries.

> Double AA So you mean AAAA?

I actually remember those things taking two AA batteries, so I may have flubbed my way into something that is still technically true.

Re: Othello Is Solved?

#203

Post by forty »

Detrytus wrote: post #83
forty wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In case you wondering like me, checkers here means American checkers, played on a smaller 8x8 board. International checkers played on 10x10 board is a much bigger space to explore of course.

Does the board size matter here? Wouldn't the strategy from 8x8 board somehow generalize to bigger boards? The one issue that I can possibly see is even vs odd board sizes, e.g. play on 9x9 board can be a bit different than 8x8 or 10x10.

Solve a 2x2 Rubik's cube and see if that helps solving a 4x4 ^^

From the computer point of view, it's more possible states to explore, so I think it makes things much harder

Re: Othello Is Solved?

#204

Post by Keyframe »

easton wrote: post #128
CyberDildonics wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mancala and connect four are classic examples of solved games. computer scientist vs. an optometrist. What does being an optometrist have to do with anything?

It’s a joke. As in “CS vs Optometry, who will win in the mancala battle of the century?!”

Unless it turns out OP is an optometrist

Re: Othello Is Solved?

#206

Post by bluGill »

kreetx wrote: post #186
bluGill wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't, you trust that God has proved.

I don't get then, how the paper "solves Othello": how does it determine the perfect game (why is it perfect)?

The claim (see other threads, it is not clear if the paper really shows this) is that you can follow their plan or any deviation from it known results. That is no matter what I play if you understand their paper you can ensure you don't lose. If I also know their paper I can force a draw, but I won't win.

Re: Othello Is Solved?

#207

Post by lanstin »

keitmo wrote: post #79
iamflimflam1 wrote: post #38

Othello is a great game to demonstrate how powerful some basic heuristics can be. There are certain squares that you should avoid placing pebble on as the game develops - equally there are squares that you should definitely try and place a pebble on if you can. Implementing these rules can give you a fairly decent opponent and it's interesting to see how quickly people will ascribe "intelligence" to something that is…

I read an article many years ago on programing Othello. I think it was BYTE Magazine, circa early 1980s. It mentioned pitting an app using a simple heuristic technique similar to the one you describe against an app using an equally simple (but devastatingly horrible) "flip the most squares" approach. The heuristic algorithm won by a landslide -- 60 to 4 or worse (I don't remember exactly).

I read that same byte article, wrote a basic version that played the heuristic way, and was unable to beat it. Good times.

Re: Othello Is Solved?

#208

Post by Marazan »

Y_Y wrote: post #144
gtbcb wrote: post #129

I would love a Wikipedia list article of games that have been solved computationally and but also games where humans can still beat computers / AI, discussing the challenges and context behinds wins / losses.

Are there any board games left where humans beat the best computers? On a related note, are there any Wikipedia list articles which are empty lists?

I couldn't imagine any computer beating a human at any Collectable Card Game in the near term. Likewise I'd imagine that computers would be at a insurmountable disadvantage at Deck Builders like Dominion in the general case (in that I could easily imagine a Computer being trained to play perfectly on a specific Kingdom but no where close to a top human on a randomly selected Kingdom).

Re: Othello Is Solved?

#210

Post by elwell »

sonofhans wrote: post #116
mark_l_watson wrote: post #89

This is cool. I solved a simpler game about 15 years ago that my brother and I used to play: an African game with about 10 pits on each side of the board that hold stones. I coded up an alpha-beta engine for it, and discovered crazy always win strategies to match how my brother and I played. Suddenly I would win all the games, and then he never wanted to play again. This was a classic match up of a computer scientist…

That is super cool. I’ve played Mankala for years and would love to hear more. It’s instructive to see old Africans playing Mankala. They play very fast. It can become more like poker, where deceit is a part of the game. If you spam down your stones fast enough sometimes you can skip a bowl, or drop an extra stone, in order to gain advantage. I’m not facile enough to play this way, and I play with family and so don’t…

> It can become more like poker, where deceit is a part of the game.

I wouldn't equate skipping a bowl with bluffing. Maybe, palming a chip as you put your bet in: which certainly isn't "part of the game".

Post reply on HN