Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 16:14:51 12/10/02
Go up one level in this thread
On December 10, 2002 at 13:42:36, Bernardo Wesler wrote: Perhaps look up in a book what 'algorithm' means actually. With just an algorithm you will never in your entire life solve it not even in a million years. You need for example also an evaluation function. Are you actually looking for perfect play in chess with one of the future software programs? >>BUT, EXPLAIN TO ME, BECAUSE I AM NOT AN EXPERT IN PROGRAMMING, DOESNT THE EVALUATION DEPEND ALSO UPON THE HARD? I do not understand what you mean with the word 'hard'. I know that you in Argentina are most likely Spanish native speaking and have some experience with south american persons, so i definitely do not blame it upon you that your english is so bad. Perhaps try to explain what you mean a little? Note i also speak german (and dutch) perhaps that helps? Best regards, Vincent >On December 10, 2002 at 07:05:44, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >>On December 09, 2002 at 22:26:11, Bernardo Wesler wrote: >> >>>Do they consider it as an uthopy? >> Consider what as an uthopy? What is your question here? > >THE ALGORITHM. A MATHEMATICAL FORMULA THAT , FOR EXAMPLE, ASSURE YOU THAT IF YOU >DO THE FIRST MOVE YOU ALWAYS WIN. >I MEAN TO THINK ABOUT DISCOVERING A CHESS ALGORITHM IS AN UTHOPY? >> >>>If so, what is the scientific reason? >> Idem >I MEAN APPLYING THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD TO TELL WHY GETTING AN ALGOTITHM SHOULD BE >CONSIDERED AS AN UTHOPY.. > >>>If it was possible, how far are they from that point? Did they find any >>>evidence? >> Away from which point? > >IS ANYBODY WORKING IN GETTING THE CHESS GAME ALGORITHM??? IF SO, HOW FAR IS HE >AHEAD? >> >>>Anyway, which is the possibility to get a very powerful chess engine or program >>>or soft that depends almost nothing upon the hardware? >> >> Hardware is very important if the evaluation of a program is very good. >> >> Of course putting gnuchess or crafty at 10000 processors >> doesn't make sense, apart >> from that making an algorithm that gives a positive speedup at 10000 >> processors is 1000x more difficult to make than a program at the level >> of gnuchess. >> >> Evaluation dominates. I see at least 3 programs which are setting >> the standards towards progress in evaluation: Brutus, Shredder, DIEP. >> >> Also indicative is Fritz. The latest fritz also has way more evaluation >> than the old versions, though it still is very little compared to the >> above 3, whereas we must see Shredder as a kind of middle solution between >> the other 2. >> >> Shredder is very well tested basically. >>BUT, EXPLAIN TO ME, BECAUSE I AM NOT AN EXPERT IN PROGRAMMING, DOESNT THE EVALUATION DEPEND ALSO UPON THE HARD? >> >> >> >> >>>Thx. >>>Dr Wesler >>>blwesler@mail.retina.ar
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.