Author: Steven Edwards
Date: 12:51:53 07/14/05
Go up one level in this thread
On July 14, 2005 at 14:55:31, Dann Corbit wrote:
>On July 13, 2005 at 23:16:05, Steven Edwards wrote:
>>So, the cognitive search mimics human search by executing one chunk (not one
>>move) of planning/exploring after another, hopping from one part of the tree to
>>anther revisiting plans and nodes with increasing effort, progressing in both
>>width and depth, reducing global uncertainty, and selecting a top level move in
>>the available time. I know of no other two person game program that searches in
>>this way. Unless there's already a name for it, I'm going to call it the P
>>search (P = Progressive).
>How do you know that this mimics human search?
See de Groot's transcripts of strong players thinking out loud. That's very
strong evidence of bimodal progression.
>Sometimes, when I play, I am trying to improve my position and not looking for
>tactics {indeed, I do not begin to look for tactics until I have a better
>position}
>Sometimes, I think about a very long range plan.
>Sometimes, I think about a near term tactical goal like a pawn to snack on (bad
>habit gathered from too many computer chess games}
>Sometimes, I pick out a piece that annoys me and try to build a huge battery
>against it.
>Sometimes, I aim to pressure the king.
>
>I don't know how chunks might come into play, and the way I think about what I
>am going to do varies quite a bit.
Imagine a large collection of rules of the form:
If detected(Pattern #4923) then perform(ActionSequence #9843)
Is there anything in your personal chess playing algoritm that can't be
expressed in a set of rules? Of course, there must be a sufficiently powerful
expression language for describing patterns and actions.
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.