Author: Gian-Carlo Pascutto
Date: 08:24:52 08/20/02
Go up one level in this thread
On August 20, 2002 at 11:03:10, Sune Fischer wrote: >>It's by far one of the most complete accounts of whats needed in the >>actual implementation of a program, it contains several new ideas, >>describes some known ones that weren't formally described before and >>it's written in a very understandable way. > >*) It says 2002 loud and clear, don't know where you get your data from. I asked. >*) I don't see any new ideas. I do. >*) The fact that it is readable to the average laymen is not a requirement of a >thesis. But increases it's value greatly. >And I find it very insulting to give a masters degree on the basis of such >junk, some of us actually work hard for that degree you know. This is very common. A Masters was awarded to Andy Van De Putte by the RUG, for Mat(h). It was a Java chess program that did not contain any new idea (contrary to 'blik'), and was weak and buggy. The promotor (Veerle Fack) did not understand even the very basics of alphabeta. Compared to this, Marcel is a genius. The level in most computer science departments that deal with AI is of a completely laughable level. I don't like this situation either. I did physics. Most of the computer chess papers would have provoked a 'is this a joke' question from my professors. Yet, all those people are getting masters degrees. I find it amazing that you are attacking Marcel, when his work wasn't really that bad. I *wish* there were more 'bad' publications like this. >>Maybe I should throw a stack of ICCA journals at you, to learn >>to relativate. > >Or maybe you should be a little more objective and less emotional. I think that if you read through a few ICCA journals, you would realize that I was being far more objective than you might think. The level of most publications there is far below this thesis. -- GCP
This page took 0.01 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.