Author: stuart taylor
Date: 06:07:34 04/30/00
Go up one level in this thread
On April 28, 2000 at 15:27:16, Dan Newman wrote: >On April 28, 2000 at 10:48:14, stuart taylor wrote: > >>On April 28, 2000 at 08:47:05, Aaron Tay wrote: >> >>>On April 28, 2000 at 06:44:16, stuart taylor wrote: >>> >>>>On April 28, 2000 at 04:39:53, Aaron Tay wrote: >>>> >>>>>On April 28, 2000 at 00:35:30, Michael Neish wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On April 27, 2000 at 21:58:09, stuart taylor wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>Is it possible to program a computer to set many possible future scenarios of >>>>>>>favourable positions possible to arrive at with same material ballance (from >>>>>>>that current position-some time later, even 40-60 ply's or more), then have >>the program find ways how to get there? >>>>>> >>>>>>I'm not sure I understand what you're saying. Do you mean having the >>>>>>computer shuffle the pieces about on the board without removing any, >>>>>>until it finds a position which is positionally superior for itself, and >>>>>>then try to find a way to get there move by move? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> I'm no expert, but this sounds terribly difficult to me, especially since its >opponent isn't exactly going to allow the computer to reach that position >without a fight, >>>>> >>>>>It seems to me that many chess books try to discourage the "I move there, you >>>>>move there, then I will move there" kind of thought..Not that ,tactics arean't >>>>>important. >>>>> >>>>>But it seems that many times,intermediate players like me are advised to do >>>>>this.. >>>>> >>>>>1)Visualise the best squares where your pieces should go, >>>>>2)form a plan based on the pawn structure, etc etc then >>>>>3)try concrete moves to achieve that plan.. >>>>> >>>>>I think he is sugguesting that..But I doubt that such a plan if succuessfully >>>>>implemented would lead to "Top class human planning skills". >>> >>> >>> >>>>I mean-with or without exchanges. If the computer could know which type of >>>>"possible" position "would" be good, then it can know what to try and >calculate. >>> >>> >>>>So the machine will be doing three things instead of the normal >>>>two. Normally it calculates, and it does so based on knowledge and its >>>>positional assesments. But a third thing would be to visualize plans and >counter plans by way of something which a computer could do-to estimate >possible resulting possitions, and to decide which of those positions should >be striven for. >>> >>>Isn;'t your third aspect already covered in a sense by the first two things? >>>"Visualize plans and resulting positions?" sounds extremly general, something >>>that computers are not good at yet... >>> >>>I suspect though, most engines already have special codes that trigger off, when >>>caluculating positions that will lead to a big change in character or position >>>i.e after large number of exchanges to a endgame, >>> >>> >>>> That would be the easy part. >>> >>>It;s sounds hard to me.. >> >>The computer has to imagine future scenarios which "could" be reached. >>Then it has to decide which of them would be good to reach. >>Then it has to see what it can reach even against good play. >>And that if the plan isn't refuted, so it will be carried out, or better. >>And if it is refuted, the program must not have become worse as a result. >> >>I'm speaking of conjuring up positions independantly of ply count, and before >>knowing exactly how it will be done. >> They do that already? I don't think they do that exactly. >>It's a deep concept I was thinking about it for a long time. And I want to know >>if any top programmers have any opinion, or could actually do it. >>The machine would be quite creative! >>S.Taylor > >I've thought about doing something very much like this--it's very like the >process I go through when I play chess... Unfortunately it's a lot easier >to do what's already been done before (because it's inherently easier and >because it's more or less fully described) and simply do the usual alpha/beta >search. > >There is a short section in the book "Problem Solving and Artificial >Intelligence", by Jean-Louis Laurière, that describes a program called >Robin, developed by Jacques Pitrat in 1972, that did something very like >this. What the program did was to come up with several plans (move >sequences by one side that achieve some goal). Then it would proceed >in a backwards direction from the goal identifying (and attempting to >eliminate) things that the opponent might do to stop the plan. > >A plan might be to take some piece with your queen. But that move is >blocked by another opponent piece, so the program would look for some way >to drive that piece off its square, and so on. It would then add >these elements to the plan until it got back to the root. > >(So, as you can see, every idea that you can come up with has likely >already been thought of by someone else back in the dark ages :). I do >think (given the improvement in programming tools and so forth) that >it's an idea that ought to be explored though...) > >-Dan.
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.