Author: Bruce Moreland
Date: 13:16:30 06/28/00
Go up one level in this thread
On June 28, 2000 at 13:58:28, Graham Laight wrote: >I assume that what you're talking about is a database of piece patterns that can >occur in a chess game, together with some indication of what these patterns >mean. > >Unfortunately, when we try to suggest that a NN is the best AI instrument for >abstract pattern recognition, all we seem to hear is that NNs are quite >incapable of being trained to recognise chess patterns - as if the mechanism of >the human brain is some sort of magic... It's easy to write an algorithm that can tell the difference between an X and an O. It's harder to write one that tell the difference between the a bunch of good guitar players, and tell you why one of them is the best, and why one solo was his best solo. I suspect that chess is more like the latter problem than the former. Humans see patterns in positions, but they are also very good at weighting the values of these patterns in specific cases, and they back this impressional knowledge up with good calculating ability. I encourage other approaches, of course. If they can be made to work, it would be significant in many ways. It would be nice if it could actually happen before the centennary of the work of Turing and Shannon though. Personally, if I had to pick a multi-generational problem to work on, it would be colonization of a nearby star system, rather than a "pure" AI approach to computer chess. bruce
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.