Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Awari Solved

michael posted more than 12 years ago | from the chess,-go-and-twister-still-not-solved dept.

Games 301

Gerard Jendras sent in a submission about applying computing power to an ancient game. The game of Awari has been solved: with perfect play, the game always results in a draw. There is a Java applet to test your skills against.

cancel ×

301 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

first (-1, Offtopic)

Shamanin (561998) | more than 12 years ago | (#4209766)

post

Re:first (-1, Offtopic)

dicepackage (526497) | more than 12 years ago | (#4209770)

second

Re:first (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4209790)

third or more

Re:first (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4209838)

fourth

Re:first (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4209880)

fifth

Re:first (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4209899)

sixth

Re:first (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4209933)

seventh

Chess (1, Insightful)

SavingPrivateNawak (563767) | more than 12 years ago | (#4209784)

Some people once said that Awari was more complex (= offered more possibilities) than Chess...

I guess this proves them wrong...

Re:Chess (3, Informative)

lightspawn (155347) | more than 12 years ago | (#4209841)

Some people once said that Awari was more complex (= offered more possibilities) than Chess...

You're thinking of Go [google.com] .

Re:Go (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4209861)

I have a perfect solution for Go:

Knock-knock.

Who's there?

Go.

Go where?

Go fish.

Re:Go (1, Offtopic)

Anonymous DWord (466154) | more than 12 years ago | (#4209949)

How about:

Knock-knock.

Who's there?

Go.

Go where?

GFAD.

Re:Chess (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4209854)

How so?

Re:Chess (1)

AvitarX (172628) | more than 12 years ago | (#4209985)

I guess what they really meant was that it is is more complex, has more possibilities then Tic-Tac-Toe :)
I am an Awari Master in my house of total novices, but I still suck.

Freecell Solitaire... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4209785)

I've heard that there's a solution for every dealt hand. I was wondering if anyone has tried anything similar to find out if this is actually true?

Re:Freecell Solitaire... (5, Interesting)

extra the woos (601736) | more than 12 years ago | (#4209813)

Nope, it's not true... If you have windows freecell, go into it and put in select game. Type in "-1" or "-2" and see for yourself :)

Re:Freecell Solitaire... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4210073)

Heh, that's funny because in the help file for the game it says:

It is believed (although not proven) that every game is winnable.

Re:Freecell Solitaire... (2, Informative)

JordoCrouse (178999) | more than 12 years ago | (#4209970)

I've heard the same thing. The next time you get what you consider to be an unsolveable game, fire up this bad boy and check it out:

freecell-solver [technion.ac.il]

Re:Freecell Solitaire... (2)

kallisti (20737) | more than 12 years ago | (#4210110)

I've heard that there's a solution for every dealt hand. I was wondering if anyone has tried anything similar to find out if this is actually true?


It is not true. [cs.uu.nl] Proof by counter-example.

Re:Freecell Solitaire... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4210126)

All of the normal (not negative) 32000 hands that come with the Microsoft version are winnable, except for 11982, which is well known to be unsolvable.

more about the game (4, Informative)

SkyIce (184974) | more than 12 years ago | (#4209796)

This is more commonly known as Mancala in the US.

An adaptation (simplified) of the game was used as a problem in last year's International Olympiad in Informatics: see the description of the problem here [win.tue.nl] . For a description of how to solve it efficiently, see this booklet [win.tue.nl] .

Re:more about the game (2, Informative)

jo-do-cus (597235) | more than 12 years ago | (#4210119)

This is more commonly known as Mancala in the US.

Actually, there are many (i believe i heard something like 1200) different varieties of the game being played all around Africa, sometimes different games with the same name, sometimes different names for one game. As it says in the article, this particular variant is also known as wari, owari, awale, etc. etc.

Some of the variants feature bigger boards, and some even include the possibility of endless moves. Many of those are more complex or have bigger search spaces than the game from the article.

So it seems there is still hope for mancala fanatics...

Awari in Quest for Glory... (2, Informative)

ChrisTower (122297) | more than 12 years ago | (#4209809)

It appeared in Serria's Quest for Glory III: Trial by Fire which was set in a mythical Africa-like kingdom that included an Egyptian-type city, a savahhana and jungle. Awari was one of the minigames that needed to be completed in order to progress through the game. They don't make them like that anymore; awari or QfG3

Re:Awari in Quest for Glory... (1)

mrpuffypants (444598) | more than 12 years ago | (#4209819)

god, i remember wasting so much time on that awari game

mostly i just hit the mouse and guessed randomly ....gimme a break, i was 10 :)

Re:Awari in Quest for Glory... (1)

John Courtland (585609) | more than 12 years ago | (#4209913)

Did you ever get all 500 points in that game? Damned hardest game to totally finish.

Re:Awari in Quest for Glory... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4209921)

I thought Trial by Fire was Quest for Glory II? Doesn't matter anyway ;).

Re:Awari in Quest for Glory... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4209994)

Trial By Fire was actually Hero's Quest 2

They redid the first game and renamed it Quest For Glory from "So you want to be a Hero; Hero's Quest" but the second game (and one of my favorites) remained unchanged

Re:Awari in Quest for Glory... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4210042)

I remember the QfG series...and Space Quest

*wipes away the tears*

I miss 'em

There is Tierra ( http://www.qknowledge.net/royalquest/index.html )

Lousy approach (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4209816)

This is just the brute force approach to problem solving.

According to a different article here [alphagalileo.org] , they solved the game by developing a program that computes the best move and eventual outcome for all trillions of positions that can possibly occur in a game. The results are stored in a database, and then they crunch the numbers. Not very elegant.

There really is nothing new about this, much like there is nothing new about linux users stuffing large sausages into their rectums [goatse.cx] .

Fun (2)

dazdaz (77833) | more than 12 years ago | (#4209820)

Strangely enough, this is quite interesting.

How about information on Japanese games?

Re:Fun (1)

Buck2 (50253) | more than 12 years ago | (#4209844)

Like what, go? There are assloads of info about go. If not go, then please be more specific.

Re:Fun (2)

Anonymous DWord (466154) | more than 12 years ago | (#4209915)

I think he means something like this. [emuita.it]

Re:Fun (1)

Buck2 (50253) | more than 12 years ago | (#4209968)

yeah, sweeeeet.

although that one is already solved, it seems.

Amazing. (5, Funny)

unicron (20286) | more than 12 years ago | (#4209827)

It seems the only way to win is not to play.

Re:Amazing. (2, Insightful)

PanBanger (465405) | more than 12 years ago | (#4209837)

You aren't gonna ask for a game of globalthermonuclear war next are you, Joshua?

all 889,063,398,406 positions (5, Funny)

Alien54 (180860) | more than 12 years ago | (#4209829)

Well, another weekend project shot all to heck ...

Dr. John W. Romein and Prof. dr. ir. Henri E. Bal solved the game by developing a program that computes the best move and eventual outcome for all 889,063,398,406 positions that can possibly occur in a game. The results are stored in a database that is 778 gigabyte large. The database was computed on a large computer cluster with 144 processors. A new and fast, parallel algorithm managed to compute the database in only 51 hours. Each processor accounted for part of the postitions, but the processors closely co-operated to determine the best moves. One complication was that the available main memory, 72 gigabyte, was by far not large enough to hold the entire database. Another problem was the heavy communication between the processors; a total of 1.0 petabit (= 10^{15} bits) was sent over the interconnection network.

Next thing I know, someone is going to try programming the database in perl. ;-)

Re:all 889,063,398,406 positions (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4210058)

Glad to hear no one actually tried to think about a solution but rather rushed right away to a brute force solution. Must have been a tough problem to solve via brute force.

Wow...... (3, Funny)

Ride-My-Rocket (96935) | more than 12 years ago | (#4210124)

And you thought Doom 3 required a lot of resources? Baby ain't got NOTHING on Mancala!

Bantumi (1)

DFX (135473) | more than 12 years ago | (#4209843)

Some Nokia cell phones include a variation of that game called Bantumi. The rules are slightly different, but the principle is the same. The computer's (phone's) gameplay is far from "perfect" though.

Uhhh. (5, Funny)

unicron (20286) | more than 12 years ago | (#4209850)

Perfect play always results in a draw? In America, we call that game tic-tac-toe, and we didn't need any computers to figure it out, either. Hell, my first day of kindergarten I was told the game was futile by other children.

double Uhhh. (2)

MarcoAtWork (28889) | more than 12 years ago | (#4209877)

so, what games do you prefer to play? If you play a game that with 'perfect play' should end in a draw, if you win or lose you know whose fault it is.

Or maybe that's why you don't like games where you can't blame luck/lousy cards/... :):)

Re:double Uhhh. (2)

unicron (20286) | more than 12 years ago | (#4209890)

With the exception of Tic-Tac-Toe and possibly this Awari game, I can't think of a single game without some factor of luck/chance in it.

Re:double Uhhh. (1)

damiam (409504) | more than 12 years ago | (#4209918)

Where's the luck in chess or Go?

Re:double Uhhh. (1)

Miriku chan (168612) | more than 12 years ago | (#4209923)

other than chess, checkers, go, othello (reversi) . . .

Re:double Uhhh. (1)

_LFTL_ (409654) | more than 12 years ago | (#4209924)

chess?

Re:double Uhhh. (2)

dvdeug (5033) | more than 12 years ago | (#4209925)

With the exception of Tic-Tac-Toe and possibly this Awari game, I can't think of a single game without some factor of luck/chance in it

Checkers, Chess, Go, Reversi (=Othello(tm)), most Chess variants . . .

Re:double Uhhh. (2)

ocie (6659) | more than 12 years ago | (#4209931)

How about:
Checkers (Chinese and domestic)
Chess
othello
go

None of these have any chance. They don't even have hidden information known to one player and not the other.

Re:double Uhhh. (2, Insightful)

Derg (557233) | more than 12 years ago | (#4209987)

Maybe I'm missing something, but there is a Huge element of chance in all the games listed. Its that unless your playing against a computer, and even in that instance, there is a Chance of Human error. Someone may move a piece they didnt intend to. A program may have been written with a susceptibility in it that makes it less than perfect. There is no such thing as a game without chance, there is always the chance of a human error, since humans, despite what some may feel, are far FAR from perfet.

Just my two cents...

Re:double Uhhh. (2)

jareds (100340) | more than 12 years ago | (#4210025)

A human can screw up playing tic-tac-toe too, it's just not that likely. When most people refer to a "game of chance" they mean something where randomness is supposed to be a fundamental part of the game, such as games that use shuffled decks of cards or dice.

Re:double Uhhh. (2)

scotch (102596) | more than 12 years ago | (#4210047)

That's a really strange usage of the word "chance" within the context of games. In tic-tac-toe, there is a chance your opponent will make a mistake, and then you could win. Of course, your opponent would have to be pretty stupid.

Re:double Uhhh. (2)

ocie (6659) | more than 12 years ago | (#4210118)

The reason I say that there is no chance is that for any move you make, you can look at the moves available to your opponent, and and for each of these, you can look at the moves available to you and so on. In a game like backgammon, monopoly, etc, there are dice or spinners or some element of randomness that keeps you from being able to make this kind of analysis.

You might think that an opponent could fool this strategy by making a few moves that the computer didn't expect. This is possible if the computer is not playing a "perfect" game. If it is playing a perfect game, then it would be able to follow your moves all the way to the end of the game and see that you could win. Therefore, it would expect you to make those moves and take whatever steps were available to it to keep you from being able to make those moves in the first place.

Re:double Uhhh. (2)

cdrudge (68377) | more than 12 years ago | (#4210130)

Global Thermonuclear War?

Re:double Uhhh. (2)

cheese_wallet (88279) | more than 12 years ago | (#4209905)

"...if you win or lose you know whose fault it is."

No you don't.

Re:Uhhh. (1)

_LFTL_ (409654) | more than 12 years ago | (#4209909)

Perfect play always results in a draw? In America, we call that game tic-tac-toe, and we didn't need any computers to figure it out, either. Hell, my first day of kindergarten I was told the game was futile by other children.

Although I imagine it's much harder to compute, I'm betting that the same could be said for chess or numerour other games. This actually makes the game more compelling rather than boring as you seem to be implying, since if one side (presumably differing only by who moves first as in this game) always has an advantage the game loses a sense of fairness.

Re: Perfect play in chess doesn't result in a draw (1)

Zork the Almighty (599344) | more than 12 years ago | (#4210127)

Actually as any religous reader of Scientific American knows, pawn to king's rook 4 is a win for white. (See http://www.ericberlin.com/reader.html if you don't know what I'm talking about)

Re:Uhhh. (2)

blonde rser (253047) | more than 12 years ago | (#4210012)

So what do you think of global thermal nuclear war then?

Re:Uhhh. (2)

unicron (20286) | more than 12 years ago | (#4210023)

It's not for me.

Simplifying the game-state set to a rule set. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4209871)

Would seem to be the next step in solving the game. It may be that something could be derived by examining the game-state set itself.

I suppose if the rule was easy someone would have found it without the brute force solving though.

That's a solution? (1)

muertos (570792) | more than 12 years ago | (#4209887)

Bud Selig has too much influence.

Re:That's a solution? (1)

JordoCrouse (178999) | more than 12 years ago | (#4209937)

Funniest damn thing I've seen all day.

Good job!

Here is Some Kylie Minogue (-1, Offtopic)

Real World Stuff (561780) | more than 12 years ago | (#4209893)

Fridays will be now be days to celebrate Kylie [kyliefever.com] .

Oh'Walhu... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4209908)

Hey, Here in Maldives we call this game Oh'Walhu (Something about holes), anyway, we have a slight twist to this game. Before playing it, the players need to drink at least four glasses of coconut toddy, or else he or she would forfit the game. Anyway, due to this reason, the game still remains unsolvable here.

Amaa Fui

3500 year old technology (3, Interesting)

cr@ckwhore (165454) | more than 12 years ago | (#4209910)

The game is estimated to be 3500+ years old. I'm really astounded by the fact that a perfect game is a draw! 3500 years ago, they created a piece of mathematical perfection... with rocks.

Re:3500 year old technology (2)

MillionthMonkey (240664) | more than 12 years ago | (#4210026)

I'm not as impressed. Tic tac toe was probably invented even earlier, and it easily meets your definition of "mathematical perfection".

Re:3500 year old technology (1)

Flarelocke (321028) | more than 12 years ago | (#4210065)

It's probably more like natural selection. We don't still play the games that are essentially lopsided, even though they existed.

Re:3500 year old technology (2)

Reality Master 101 (179095) | more than 12 years ago | (#4210072)

Sheesh, the didn't solve the game 3500 years ago. What's so mathematically astounding about it? A game has three possible outcomes: draw, first player to move always win, second player to move always win. None of the outcomes are more "pure" than any of the others./p:

Re:3500 year old technology (2)

edrugtrader (442064) | more than 12 years ago | (#4210093)

they had stone henge to use for development.

What about Go? (1)

anonymous_wombat (532191) | more than 12 years ago | (#4209934)

A new and fast, parallel algorithm managed to compute the database in only 51 hours.

That might take 54 or even 55 hours.

Re:What about Go? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4210036)

Go is a FUCKLOAD harder than chess or awari. There's no solution for it in sight.

With enough storage, Chess could be solved too. (2, Insightful)

UOZaphod (31190) | more than 12 years ago | (#4209939)

Chess has a finite number of squares and a finite number of pieces, thus the total number of possible boards in chess is also finite.

With sufficient storage and proper linking of data, the decision for the next move could be reduced to simply following the chain that leads the highest probability of success.

Considering that either side can use the same data, it is possible with perfect play chess would also lead to a draw every time.

Re:With enough storage, Chess could be solved too. (1)

_LFTL_ (409654) | more than 12 years ago | (#4209989)

While chess and awari share the property that the number of possible game-states is finite. Chess differs from awari in that the number of games (paths to a state) is infinite as it is quite easy to go back to a previous state in chess (which can lead to a stalemate if done repeadetly on successive moves). Awari's rules terminate the game after one position has occurred 3 times, and one could argue that chess has the same type of termination rule but as far as I know this only occurs if the moves go back and forth successively.

Re:With enough storage, Chess could be solved too. (1)

Xerithane (13482) | more than 12 years ago | (#4210015)

...and one could argue that chess has the same type of termination rule but as far as I know this only occurs if the moves go back and forth successively.

No, chess is only a draw if it's 3 successive checks. And you can still play it out unless you are in a tournament. It's a common tactic to force a draw to keep checking the upper player forcing him to either move away and lose his advantage or drawing the game (better than losing)

Re:With enough storage, Chess could be solved too. (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4210060)

There are exactly 4 ways to draw in chess:

Accept a draw offer

Get stalemated (no legal move, but not in check)

Repeat the exact same position (same player to move, same en-passant square, etc.) 3 times (not necessarily in a row, or in check either)

Make 50 moves without moving a pawn or capturing a piece

Re:With enough storage, Chess could be solved too. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4210082)

"Make 50 moves without moving a pawn or capturing a piece"

Ok. You keep count.

Where the hell did you learn chess (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4210091)

There's a draw if a position is repeated three times (not necessarily consecutively) [gamecolony.com] .

There's no rule about consecutive checks. In fact some fun chess problems involve dozens of consecutive checks.

Re:With enough storage, Chess could be solved too. (1, Informative)

spakka (606417) | more than 12 years ago | (#4210099)

No, chess is only a draw if it's 3 successive checks

No, it's if the same position occurs 3 times, not necessarily on successive moves. But someone needs to claim the draw. If nobody claims, the game can go on indefinitely

See Laws of Chess [fide.com] for more details.

Re:With enough storage, Chess could be solved too. (1)

outsider007 (115534) | more than 12 years ago | (#4210071)

but it's the number of possible game-states that's important, not the number of possible games because if you know the proper move for each state that will result in a draw every time you have the 'perfect play' that they're talking about here.

Re:With enough storage, Chess could be solved too. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4210049)

Chess has a finite number of squares and a finite number of pieces, thus the total number of possible boards in chess is also finite.

With sufficient storage and proper linking of data, the decision for the next move could be reduced to simply following the chain that leads the highest probability of success.

Considering that either side can use the same data, it is possible with perfect play chess would also lead to a draw every time.


Combinatorics are not your friend. Awari is relatively simple because all the stones are exactly alike, the entire space of 3e53 (48 stones in 13 positions (including captured) is reduced by quite a lot, I don't have the math to figure it out myself, the number is in the document. In chess, you have 64 pieces but they are of several different types, so the number of combinations is much greater, starting with 32 pieces in 65 locations begin the count at 1e58 and have much fewer reductions.

Re:With enough storage, Chess could be solved too. (2, Informative)

littleRedFriend (456491) | more than 12 years ago | (#4210121)

Yes, there is about 5.26e+36 different ways of putting the pieces on a board. A harddisk that could hold this data (and subsequent best moves) would take a significant amount of our solar system and surrounding stars, even is we could encode a bit a single atom level.

The Perfect Game (1)

NickisGod.com (453769) | more than 12 years ago | (#4209940)

I can hear the computerish monotone right now:

"Would you like to play a nice game of Global Thermonuclear Warfare?"

Draw.

This sounds just like the solution Data used... (2, Interesting)

saskboy (600063) | more than 12 years ago | (#4209946)

When the android stalemated an opponent at a board game in Star Trek. The best his computer brain could do to beat the alien, was to play ultimately to a draw, and hence the opponent would never win. I guess Star Trek predicted the future of AI pretty well ;-P

Chess (0)

Wandering Idiot (563842) | more than 12 years ago | (#4209954)

So, does anyone know *about* how many possible games of chess there are? I'm guessing it's quite a few more than Awari, else it would have been solved by now.

Personally, I'm curious to see whether you can always force a draw or if the first player to move always wins.

Re:Chess (2)

anonymous_wombat (532191) | more than 12 years ago | (#4209974)

The estimate that I have heard thrown around is 10^120.

What is the alternative? (2)

ocie (6659) | more than 12 years ago | (#4209956)

If perfect play didn't end in a draw, would this mean that the first player (or second) could do something to ensure a win?

Re:What is the alternative? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4210085)

Yes. Hex is an example of an unsolved game where the first player can always win (we just don't know how yet because the proof is non-constructive.)

DEFCON 1 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4209962)

When the WHOPPER figures this one out

Important Step? (5, Insightful)

rockmuelle (575982) | more than 12 years ago | (#4209972)

From the article:

"The research is an important step forward in a research area within Artificial Intelligence, to solve games with increasing complexity"

I don't quite understand why a big lookup table is an important step for AI. Humans don't play games by checking every possible move and picking the best one and never will.

The AI community really needs to stop looking for tricks that allow computers to solve problems in ways that humans never could and instead spend their time trying to understand how intelligence actually works.

Hint: scrap predicate logic (and in doing so the Turing machine) as the model for intelligence. Instead, define a model from which predicate logic can emerge (Reginald Cahill has more or less done this, but I'm not sure if he realizes it yet: Process Physics [flinders.edu.au] .).

-Chris

depends on what you call perfect (5, Insightful)

Eric Seppanen (79060) | more than 12 years ago | (#4209979)

There are lots of games where you can create a "perfect" player that can do as well as possible against other "perfect" players.

The thing that's interesting is making a program that plays as well as possible against imperfect players, as demonstrated by the RoShamBo Programming Competition [ualberta.ca] .

In other news... (1, Offtopic)

Scutter (18425) | more than 12 years ago | (#4209982)

And in other news, still no cure for cancer.

Game board/peices? (2)

tweakt (325224) | more than 12 years ago | (#4209990)

http://www.cs.ualberta.ca/~awari/

Wow, that Awari game looks quite cool. Does anyone know where I can get one, possibly hand made (doesn't need to be 3500 years old though). It seems way cooler than just a basic chess board (though its cool to have a nice one of those too).

The stones look like those that you can buy, just polished rocks. But the cool fold-up game board is nice. Carved from wood, it would be damn nice to have in the living room. You could even bring it down to the local coffee shop instead of a deck of cards ;-)

Re:Game board/peices? (1)

Derg (557233) | more than 12 years ago | (#4210035)

Any respectable game store should have a board and pieces. Maybe listed under the name Mancala, its pretty popular... atleast where I am from in the midwest... then again, farming is popular here too... :p

As for specifics, I've seen them in the toy sections of Walgreens' for under $5, a wooden board, folded, with all the necessary pieces and a 2 page instruction set thats pretty weak, but general enough to get people started..

Re:Game board/peices? (1)

dfinster (65564) | more than 12 years ago | (#4210038)

I've seen a fairly nice set at Wal-Mart for around $15.00.

I usually play one game a day or so on my Nokia cell phone. It's called "Bantumi" for some odd reason on the Nokia 3390, but it's the same game and rules. I can normally beat the highest level on the phone about 25% of the time.

Another tip for a cheap set - Use an egg carton and pennies. I used to play this way when I was a kid.

Re:Game board/peices? (4, Funny)

cosmol (143886) | more than 12 years ago | (#4210098)

Yeah, I know where to find them. Go to your local grocery store and ask to be directed to the dairy section. There you will find eggs in what are called "cartons." Some cartons may contain only six, some contain 18, you want the one that has 12 eggs in it. On your way to the register, stop by the toy aisle and pick up a few packs of marbles.

Similar game in south india (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4209991)

We have a similar game in south india (Called "Pallankuzhi" in my native tongue) that is more complicated. Typically you use smooth sea-shells for the pieces. Each side has 7 holes instead of 6 and you start of with 12 shells in each hole except the center one on either side which only have one large shell. Here is some mention of it on the web:
http://www.unifr.ch/psycho/pgp/boardgames/ab stract sFinal.html

I solved chess ! (1)

ferratus (244145) | more than 12 years ago | (#4210016)

Although solving checkers seems feasible, chess and go are not solvable in the foreseeable future.


I did it. With a scientific method and a few hours of play, I was able to solve the game of chess. Indeed, it seems I lose even when I play my best.

Kind of Bummed - Just Brute Force (5, Insightful)

zetetikos (150524) | more than 12 years ago | (#4210024)

I'm kind of bummed that this solution is by enumerating every position, rather than some kind of huristic or mathmatical solution. I don't find brute force methods to be very elegant or interesting, although they do present their own chalenges from a resource management perspective. I'll be much more interested if they can analyse the information they have and come up with a computational approach that plays perfectly. It's likely that such a thing could then be generalized to solve many other types of problems.

Zetetikos

a perfect game (1)

reconn (578681) | more than 12 years ago | (#4210046)

The game of Awari has been solved: with perfect play, the game always results in a draw.

Personally, I wouldn't trust a game in which playing a perfect game was rewarded with losing. That just means an element of uncertainty was inserted somewhere along the line, and then it's no longer a game of skill, but of chance.

Next up... (2)

arfy (236686) | more than 12 years ago | (#4210094)

Next, Gerard Jendras posts links to solutions of the Universal Field Theory, the I.R.S. Tax Code, and How To Pick Up Girls!

Seriously, how long until Go or Go-Moku is cracked? And how many people will damage themselves if chess is ever solved?

I wanna know if anyone can win... (0)

dorker (248189) | more than 12 years ago | (#4210097)

the last level of Quake3 with Xaero on nightmare level!

perfect play? (1)

evalhalla (581819) | more than 12 years ago | (#4210103)

I wonder what "perfect play" is: playing the move with the highest chance to win? the highest chance not to loose? something else?

obligitory retarded slashdot jokes (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4210107)

You can't mod me down.. I said obligatory

Dr. John W. Romein and Prof. dr. ir. Henri E. Bal solved the game by developing a program that computes the best move and eventual outcome for all 889,063,398,406 positions that can possibly occur in a game. The results are stored in a database that is 778 gigabyte large. The database was computed on a large computer cluster with 144 processors. A new and fast, parallel algorithm managed to compute the database in only 51 hours.

1) Imagine a Beowulf cluster of those!

2) Business Plan
1 - Write software to beat awari
2 - ???
3 - Profit!

3) I like linux. Ever since I installed it I wake up with a red, swollen, puckered asshole.

btw, mods, they're no funnier in any other topic.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?