Author: Albert Silver
Date: 13:28:51 07/11/00
Go up one level in this thread
On July 10, 2000 at 18:55:11, Bruce Moreland wrote:
>On July 10, 2000 at 14:56:31, Christophe Theron wrote:
>
>>On July 10, 2000 at 14:15:39, Terry Ripple wrote:
>>
>>>I know Hiarcs7.32 is one of the most knowledge based programs, but what about
>>>the famous Shredder4, Rebel Century and Junior6? Where do they average on
>>>knowledge in comparison?
>>>
>>>Best regards,
>>>terry
>>
>>
>>For me the answer is easy. I know others will disagree...
>>
>>The program that knows the most about chess, and has the most relevant
>>knowledge, is the one that stands the highest in the rating lists.
>>
>>
>> Christophe
>
>I don't think this is a very good definition, although nobody ever defines it
>when they ask which program has the most. I think that what people mean when
>they say "knowledge" is that a program with more knowledge plays more like a
>strong human and less like a typical computer, since everyone would agree that a
>GM human typifies "knowledge".
>
>People want "knowledge" in a program because they think they can learn from
>seeing it expressed. They want knowledge because they want to ask questions of
>something knowledgeable and get answers.
>
>This has little to do with which robot whacks the other robots. Computers can
>play chess in a vacuum, if desired. It's an interesting thing to do, and lots
>of people are interested in doing it. But other people are interested in
>interacting with the program themselves.
>
>bruce
It all depends on what the user is after. For GMs, short of a tactical
revelation, the evaluation given by a program is inevitably inferior to theirs
due to their superior understanding. As no program can really compete with this
yet, they are inevitably used solely for their tactical acuity. On the other
hand, GMs do not make up the majority of chessplayers so while programs such as
Junior, Crafty, and Shredder may not be teaching the GMs anything new, weaker
players can benefit from their knowledge. When a program doesn't reach any
absolute conclusion on a position, then one must try to find which program has
the greatest likelihood of offering a correct assessment. GMs can turn to
themselves for this, but others are either forced to ask someone, or turn to
their program.
Albert Silver
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.