Author: Uri Blass
Date: 06:30:39 12/09/02
Go up one level in this thread
On December 09, 2002 at 09:22:27, Bob Durrett wrote: >On December 09, 2002 at 09:10:16, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On December 09, 2002 at 08:33:39, Bob Durrett wrote: >> >>>On December 09, 2002 at 06:47:24, Kurt Utzinger wrote: >>> >>>>Why last hope? We should be aware of the fact that improvements can/will only be >>>>(very) small and average chess people will even not be able to notice. >>>>Kurt >>>> >>>>http://www.beepworld.de/members39/utzinger >>> >>>So, is it reasonable to infer that chess engines have come to a dead end, where >>>the only significant improvements will come from hardware improvements? >>> >>>Bob D. >> >>I think that you need to wait some years for it to happen. >>Chess engines are not close to their real potential. >> >>Uri > >Well, that makes me feel better. : ) > >Could you say WHY you believe that chess engines are not close to their real >potential? What sort of improvements, not resulting from hardware improvements, >do you anticipate? I believe that programs generates trees that are too big and it is possible to get the same target by clearly smaller trees. I believe that the evaluation also can be improved significantly. Programs do not know about theoretical draws of KRPP vs KR and it is only one example. 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.