Author: Ed Schröder
Date: 23:26:26 12/11/99
Go up one level in this thread
>Posted by Robert Hyatt on December 11, 1999 at 21:08:12: > >Comp vs Comp will say nothing about how comp vs human goes. IE for an example, >Tiger 12 looks _very_ strong vs computers, but so-so against humans. I have >not yet studied its games very carefully, although I now have a couple of dozen >games vs Crafty on ICC and FICS. It seems to be perfectly tuned to beat >computers... it seems very materialistic and ready to accept any gambit offered, >and they try to make the opponent justify it accurately. >How it is going to do once it is out 'en masse' will be very interesting to >watch. Same here. >But it clearly isn't doing _nearly_ as well vs humans (even with anti-human on) >as it is doing against other programs... Do you have some game examples that supports your strong judgement? Ed >Which is completely not surprising. I said several years ago that to attempt to >write a program to blast to the top of the SSDF is a _totally_ different thing >from trying to write a program to blast to the top of the FIDE rating list. > >The games are too different...
This page took 0.01 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.