Author: Russell Reagan
Date: 01:41:44 06/20/02
Go up one level in this thread
On June 20, 2002 at 00:59:42, Robert Hyatt wrote: >That is why I _still_ maintain that 90% of the aggregate computer chess >advancements were academia-based. Because all academia-developed ideas have >been published for all to see, increasing the body of computer-chess knowledge >slowly but surely. So, for example, alpha-beta and null-move were published, so they are in common usage today and have advanced computer chess overall. What Fritz, Junior, Tiger, Shredder, Rebel, etc. do is unpublished, so their achievements have done nothing to further the computer chess community as a whole. That makes sense, but it doesn't necessarily mean that their achievements are any less significant. In other words, if all of the top commercial programs were suddenly open source, and each author wrote a book about the inner workings of their program, don't you think there would be another revolutionary idea born within the near future, or at least that overall the entire community would discover new ideas to push the envelope with? I think so, but you have a few decades of experience over me, so you'd know better than I :) Russell
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.