Author: Graham Laight
Date: 07:58:41 10/13/04
Go up one level in this thread
On October 13, 2004 at 10:51:30, Peter Skinner wrote: >On October 13, 2004 at 10:34:50, Graham Laight wrote: > >>At the risk of being argumentative, I'm afraid I disagree with your view. > >That is allowed from time to time :) > >>Between them, Fritz and Hydra score 7/8 in Bilbao. I have just run the >simulator >>(http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?391364) for an 8 game >>tournament, with the win probability at 33%, the draw probability at 34%, and >>the lose probability at 33%. If you truly believe that GMs can crush computers >>at will (implied by you 4 paragraphs above), then these odds are very generous. >> >>The results? >> >>0.52% probability of achieving 7 points >>0.09% probability of achieving 7.5 points >>0.03% probability of achieving 8 points >> > >Here is a scenario that I would like you to think about. > >Take the top 5 computers, and the top 5 GM in the world. Set them up in a "skin" >format tournament where $50,000 per game is at stake. Time control is standard >tournament time controls. The winner gets it all, the loser gets nothing, and in >the event of a draw, the money is carried over to the next game. > >I am willing to wager that the humans take home 90% of the money. If not all of >it. > >It is amazing that when money is on the line, the best human players shine. >Computers know nothing of "stakes" in this type of event. Human nature, and >greed will crush the silicons.. So - the human players at Bilbao (Ruslan Ponomariov, Véselin Topálov and Sergey Karjakin) were simply not sufficiently well motivated, then? -g >Peter
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.