Author: Hans Gerber
Date: 03:49:41 05/08/00
Go up one level in this thread
On May 08, 2000 at 00:27:45, Robert Hyatt wrote: >It is a classic experiment. The question: "can a computer beat the world >champion in a match, at tournament time controls?" To answer it, you pit a >computer against the world champion in a tournament time control match. The >'noise' about "he should have had more games to study" or "he should have been >given the printouts" or "he should have had this or that" are all reasonable >points, but they had _nothing_ to do with the question being asked. And >the 'experiment' was set up to answer that question, and that question only. >I don't see how it can be thought of as "invalid"... > What you call _noise_ is most interesting. For a scientist it's clear, that you had to _control_ all the noise to be able to get an answer to the original question. The question "can a computer beat the world champion in a match, at tournament time controls". Or did you understand the question this way: "beat the champion under the control of the 'time'"? :)
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.