Author: Anthony Cozzie
Date: 09:23:19 10/08/03
Go up one level in this thread
On October 08, 2003 at 11:49:53, James T. Walker wrote: >On October 08, 2003 at 06:31:38, George Tsavdaris wrote: > >>On October 08, 2003 at 05:40:40, Torstein Hall wrote: >> >>>http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=1229 >>> >>>Is realy programs getting stronger compared to humnan GM's? >>> >>>(In my view they are) >>> >>>Torstein >> >>"Although computers obviously must be improving in recent years, the strongest >>humans seem to also be improving at about the same rate." >> >>a) The ELO performance in the graph, of the strongest human player(Kasparov), >>in the last 6 years is almost a straight line that stays the same. >>b) The SSDF maximum ELO performance in the graph is inceasing in the last 6 >>years, although the way SSDF handles it's rating list makes this less important >>for belying his above statement. >>c)Every year, we have an increase at the plies a chess-computer searches at a >>given time(due to improved search techniques and hardware speed) and also >>programmers add more knowledge at chess-computers. Humans can't improve so >>much every year to compensate this one(or two) plies and in fact they improve >>only 5 % - 10 % in relation with comps. >> >> Due to the above 3 reasons and especially the c) , his statement seems to >>me wrong. >> It's ridiculous to say that computers are not getting stronger compared to >>GM's (Mr Jeff Sonas didn't(yet?) said that). And it's ridiculous to say >>that: "I don't believe that computers will inevitably surpass the top humans". >>This thing is inevitable. >> Of course this has nothing to do with todays strength of computers, as indeed >>may be lower, than that of top GM's. > >I think that the basic "idea" of his article is correct in that computers have >not made much progress vs top humans lately. But he seems to ignore the real >reason. The top GM's are taking computers more seriously now. They are >learning how to play vs computers which they didn't take seriously several years >ago. Computers are getting stronger but GM'a are adjusting. The problem is >they cannot adjust forever. The computers will surpass them all (humans)very >soon. >I think if humans were to play computers now without knowing the opponent was a >computer then they are already behind the curve. That is if they played them >straight up like a normal GM game. Their anti-computer tactics are holding on >for now. As programmers clean up the holes in anti-computer tactics then humans >will fall by the wayside. >Jim Agree 100%. anthony
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.