Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Learning problems of Tiger

Author: blass uri

Date: 21:33:39 01/19/00

Go up one level in this thread


On January 19, 2000 at 21:38:05, James B. Shearer wrote:

>On January 19, 2000 at 21:22:29, Christophe Theron wrote:
>
>>As I said, I am reluctant to spend too much time in this. I think it is mostly
>>useful in comp-comp games, with very little benefit for the user. That's why I
>>did not implement agressive book learning (trying to replay won openings).
>>
>>I think customers want us to spend more efforts in adding knowledge in our
>>engines than in specialized anticomputers algorithms.
>
>           I don't agree.  I play blitz against programs and I lose interest if
>they play the same losing line repeatedly.
>                              James B. Shearer

In the case of tiger it did not play the same games but only the same mistakes
in the opening so I do not think that you can win it again and again in the same
opening.

Junior could do it but it is because computers can translate a small advantage
to a win but I do not believe that humans can translate small advantage to a win
in blitz again and again when the opponent does not play the same game but only
does a small mistake in the opening.

Uri



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.