Re: [gnugo-devel] regressions and bugs

[Emanuele Cisbani]

2007/12/6, Gunnar Farnebäck <address@hidden>:
[...]
> The semeai reading isn't concerned with territory, only the result of
> the semeai. To choose move with respect to territory is the
> responsibility of the value_moves code. (Incidentally A9 and C9 do not
> lose territory, black is forced to play there eventually anyway. It's
> just not urgent.)

Ok, I will revise the STS-RV_0.tst file for problems like this,
so maybe some one of the 8 fails will be recovered, refining the test.

> I'm not sure how best to handle this test, possibly change it to
> tactical reading tests, but for now you can leave it and make a note
> about the problem.

Ok, same task to do for me, as above.
But in this case if we accept a failure we can miss eventually
a bigger mistake of GNU Go if the result become for example

1 FAILED: Correct '1 1 (PASS|A9|C9)', got '0 0 F9'

How can we manage this risk?

> In general the interaction between tactical reading and semeai reading
> is complicated when there are few liberties in the semeai. Sometimes
> the tactical reading gets it wrong and fools up everything. With
> sufficient liberties the tactical reading doesn't get involved and the
> semeai reading can do its work as intended.

Consequently to your assertions I'm lead to think the tactical reading
function should be inhibited when semeai reading is invoked by the
analyze_semeai regression test function. It's correct?

-- 
Emanuele
http://www.google.com/reader/shared/07971903590737268053