Building Opening Books for 9×9 Go Without Relying on Human Go Expertise
Keh-Hsun Chen1 & Peigang Zhang2 Show affiliations
- University of North Carolina at Charlotte, United States
- , United States
Journal of Computer Science, Volume 8, Issue 10, pp. 1594–1600 · doi.org/10.3844/jcssp.2012.1594.1600
Abstract
Problem statement: Expert level opening knowledge is beneficial to game playing programs. Unfortunately, expert level opening knowledge is only sparsely available for 9×9 Go. We set to build expert level opening books for 9×9 Go. Approach: We present two completely different approaches to build opening books for 9×9 Go without relying on human Go expertise. The first approach is based on game outcome statistics on opening sequences from 300,000 actual 9×9 Go games played by computer programs. The second approach uses off-line stage-wise Monte-Caro tree search. Results: After “solution tree” style trimming, the opening books are compact and can be used effectively. Testing results show that GoIntellect using the opening books is 4% stronger than GoIntellect without the opening books in terms of winning rates against Gnugo and other programs. In addition, using an opening book makes the program 10% faster. Conclusion: Classical knowledge and search approach does not work well in the game of Go. Recent development in Monte-Carlo tree search brings a breakthrough and new hope-computer programs have started challenging human experts in 9×9 Go. A well constructed opening book can further advance the state of the art in computer Go.
Licence and reuse
Free to read. This article carries the publisher’s copyright, as printed on it: © 2012 Science Publications. It is free to read; ask us before reusing it.
How to reuse this articleResponses (0)
About this article
Chen, K. & Zhang, P. (2012). Building Opening Books for 9×9 Go Without Relying on Human Go Expertise. Journal of Computer Science, 8(10), 1594–1600. https://doi.org/10.3844/jcssp.2012.1594.1600
- Licence
- © Science Publications
- Issue
- Volume 8, Issue 10
- Policies
- Editorial independenceUse of generative AIData availabilityAppeals and complaints
- Version
- Version of record
