Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 08:03:30 05/18/00
Go up one level in this thread
On May 16, 2000 at 23:04:06, Mark Ryan wrote: >On May 16, 2000 at 16:16:56, Stephen Ham wrote: > >[snip] > >>Once this experiment finishes, I think the next step will be to have a computer >>aided human play 4 games versus a strong CC master who plays without a computer >>move generator. We are open to suggestions regarding how to do this. Thanks >>again for your continuing interest. >> >>Sincerely, >> >>Stephen Ham > >Hi, Steve: You asked for suggestions: >1. As you know, for any experiment to be realistic, it must duplicate the >anticipated conditions as precisely as possible. Therefore, the person playing >with the aid of a computer should be an experienced correspondence player who >could make a breakthrough with the machine's help (probably involving tactical >strength). >2. Gary Kasparov has been promoting "Advanced Chess", in which over-the-board >players can use computers during play. Advanced Chess matches seem to indicate >that computer assistance benefits some players more than others. I don't know >what impact this will have on correspondence chess - - I would guess that >correspondence chess, with its long time controls (allowing human players more >time to see tactics), would be less affected than over-the-board chess - - but >it might be good to keep an eye on it. One of the biggest problems with the experimental design will be gathering enough data to achieve statistical significance. Since correspondence games take so long to play, gathering a single point of data will be slow. Suggestion: Take a poll of correspondence players. Find out which ones never use computers, which ones sometimes use computers, and which ones always use computers (or the opponent is a computer). Then use this data as a starting point.
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.