Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 05:59:18 03/10/00
Go up one level in this thread
On March 10, 2000 at 04:57:42, Torstein Hall wrote: >On March 09, 2000 at 20:58:09, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On March 09, 2000 at 16:58:07, José Antônio Fabiano Mendes wrote: >> >>>[....]Three Studies >>>Eleven studies had long since been prepared for testing >>>the program---several years earlier I had written in an >>>introduction to a collection of studies by G.Nadareishvili >>>that it was with studies that one should begin experiments. >>>My reasoning was simple---in studies there is forcing tactical >>>play,positionnal evaluation is not needed,and since positional >>>"understanding" was to be the last thing to be put into the program, >>>one should therefore begin with studies... >>>We began with a famous study by Réti. >>>[D]7K/8/k1P5/7p/8/8/8/8 w - - >>> White to play and draw >>>What could be simpler,and at the same time cleverer than this >>>composition?[....] >>>And so,during December 1976 to January 1977,"Pioneer" solved >>>Réti´s study.We thought that it would all be very simple,but >>>it proved to be highly complicated.Without any positional >>>evaluation,and without the attachment of the endgame library, >>>the tree "disintegrated".The computer had little other work, >>>but hours went by,and still no result.It became clear that >>>"Pioneer" needed help! >>>We took the rule of the square,programmed it in three modifications, >>>put it into the library,and at each node of the tree "Pioneer" >>>received from the library the necessary information.The effect >>>was staggering:the study was solved within 70 minutes,and in the >>>search tree there were only 54 moves.This small "human" tree was >>>first obtained on 28th January 1977---without doubt a significant >>>date in cybernetics.[...] >>>Source:"Selected Games 1967-1970",M.M.Botvinnik,Pergamon Press,1981, >>>pages 299 and 300 >>>So it seems that,contrary to widespread belief,Botvinnik thought his >>>computer-chess work to be very important. JAFM >> >> >>He thought it very important... most of the rest of us didn't... as it >>seems that most of the results were faked... > >What do base your conclusion that the relults where faked on? > >Torstein Some PVs he published in the JICCA that were obviously 'faked'... he would make a comment that pioneer decided "this variation can be stopped as obviously white is winning" but in another almost identical position, pioneer would keep searching. Hans Berliner had a very good (if very abrasive) rebuttal article that he published in the JICCA in response to Berliner's article. His analysis was concise, accurate, and devastating to Berliner's statements...
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.