Author: blass uri
Date: 14:44:22 07/19/00
Go up one level in this thread
On July 19, 2000 at 15:02:14, Amir Ban wrote: >On July 19, 2000 at 11:06:13, Alvaro Polo wrote: > >>On July 19, 2000 at 08:14:56, Amir Ban wrote: >> >>>On July 19, 2000 at 03:55:44, blass uri wrote: >>> >>>>On July 18, 2000 at 19:10:46, Amir Ban wrote: >>>> >>>>>On July 18, 2000 at 14:05:46, Jeroen Noomen wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On July 18, 2000 at 09:29:12, Amir Ban wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>Amir, >>>>>> >>>>>>I agree that Junior earned its points honestly. I also agree with most you write >>>>>>about these games. Still, you don't point out anything about the losses against >>>>>>Kramnik and Piket. And that was exactly what I had in mind writing this thread. >>>>>>Those two games showed exactly where chess computer programs still can be >>>>>>improved. And HAVE to be improved, otherwise human GM's will have good chances >>>>>>to get more points next year. And they will, because they have learnt. >>>>>> >>>>>>IMO if you solve most of the problems about king's attacks and closed positions, >>>>>>then it will be almost impossible for the strongest GM's ta beat a computer. >>>>>>Because in that case they have no advantage in any type of position anymore. But >>>>>>in 2000 there is still not much to be done when a clever player manages to block >>>>>>the position or start a slow attack: The programs do not know about this and >>>>>>only human mistakes will save them. >>>>>> >>>>>>So the crucial question is: When will one of the leading programmer stop >>>>>>searching for higher NPS, better searching techniques etc? When somebody will >>>>>>REALLY tackle the 2 problems I mentioned? Because otherwise a computer can still >>>>>>be beaten in 2010, running on 500 GHz. But as I already mentioned: This is the >>>>>>computerchess paradox: NOBODY wants to sac NPS for more knowledge. And as long >>>>>>as nobody wants to quit this 'rule', human GM's are still superior in knowledge >>>>>>and understanding of the game. >>>>>> >>>>>>Jeroen >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>The speed vs. knowledge dilemma is a false one. It may apply to Rebel and other >>>>>programs, but it doesn't apply to Junior, where I have a framework to code >>>>>evaluation stuff virtually for free. >>>> >>>>2 questions: >>>>1)I guess that the fact that you can add evaluation stuff virtually for free >>>>in run time make adding knowledge to the evaluation less simple and you need >>>>more time to do the design decisions to change the evaluation function relative >>>>to other programs. >>>> >>>>Am I correct? >>>> >>> >>>No >> >>I'll believe that adding new knowledge to Junior is almost free. I have then two >>questions. >> >>1.- Why isn't then Junior's evaluation much better? Please don't misunderstand >>me. I am sure it has a great evaluation but, one may think that when things are >>almost free you could just add any bit of knowledge that you might consider >>useful under any circumstance and have a really astounding, hypergreat, out of >>this world evaluation. >> > >Because the problem is not writing evaluation terms but deciding which one's are >right or formulating them correctly. Not to mention giving them correct weight. > >I don't know where many posters in this newsgroup get the idea that "knowledge" >in chess is obvious and it's just a matter of coding it. I get the idea by watching games of chess system tal. My knowledge about this program is that the programmer did not use a lot of time for giving the correct weights and inspite of this fact I can see it often cause problems to top programs. I read that the programmer chris used Thorsten as a beta tester and Thorsten decided by watching games about changes in the parameters. I can see that chess system tal often wins against other top programs at long time control games. It won Fritz6a with black by 1.e4 a6 and also with white and junior also has problems against it in public games(exactly 15 minutes per move) and in one of them Junior's evaluation is almost 2 pawns for tal. You can see the game against Fritz with 1.e4 a6 and the games against Junior in the following URLs: http://www.oxford-softworks.com/cgi-bin/forums/mschess/630.html http://www.oxford-softworks.com/cgi-bin/forums/mschess/629.html I do not like chess sytem tal because I do not like the behaviour of the programmer and I hope that programmers will stop this program from winning. Uri
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.