Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 11:57:01 06/13/00
Go up one level in this thread
On June 13, 2000 at 14:48:34, Mogens Larsen wrote: >On June 13, 2000 at 14:19:31, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >>That's just your opinion of "understanding." I think that computers understand >>chess just fine. > >Yes, that's my opinion. I'm also of the belief that you're wrong. > >>But opening books are an inherent part of computer chess programming. Otherwise, >>why does every program have one? I don't see the difference... > >Most opening books are not a result of programming (except when it comes to >format, but obviously doesn't count) or output generated by the program itself, >ie. learning files and games. Thereby it isn't an integrated part of a program, >but an attachment. > >>But humans have teachers and read books. Surely programmers can teach their >>programs...? > >The problem is that computer programs gets the answers without asking the >question so to speak. Making mistakes and learning is an integrated part of a >teaching process. Programmers don't teach anything, they offer something the >program can't refuse nor reflect upon. They offer knowledge that has already >been processed. I'm sorry if it's a little unclear, but I'm neither a programmer >nor a grandmaster :o). Computers understand tactics. They don't plan at all (at least none that have source code available plan). Tactically, they are clearly better than humans. As far as opening books, they are an accumulation. Consider chess 200 years ago. Were the same openings be played as today? No they won't. And why not? Because after hundreds of thousands of games under careful scrutiny, weaknesses were found in various lines of play. It is obvious that humans "use opening books" because the style of the game and types of attacks used change over time. Consider all the games played by GM's and super GM's in the past century. This is the equivalent of millions of hours of supercomputer effort at analysis. The information is compounded, analyzed, and reported. The players read books on the findings. Humans do amass opening books. Those who want to reduce the strength of computers will just find some other excuse why it is not fair. We can't multiply two 9 digit numbers as fast as a computer can. Did the computer cheat? [FCOL]
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.