Author: Tony Werten
Date: 08:41:18 08/20/02
Go up one level in this thread
On August 20, 2002 at 11:24:52, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: >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. This is the point I was making to start with. One, or actually 2 more points. The computerscience department of Eindhoven already made this mistake with a thesis about computerchess back in 88. (accepting old stuff ) The supervisor of this paper is from the "architectural design" department. ( Bouwkunde ). His knowledge about AI is "If you put all the knowledge of all architects in a computerprogram, you have a computerprogram that can design buildings". When I tried to explain the complexity of this and some basic minimaxing I got a confused look and a "You should write a thesis about that" Tony > >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 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.