Author: blass uri
Date: 23:31:05 07/11/00
Go up one level in this thread
On July 12, 2000 at 01:13:21, Ed Schröder wrote: >On July 11, 2000 at 23:39:47, Christophe Theron wrote: > >>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 >> >> >> >>I did not say "computer rating lists" but just "rating lists". >> >>My definition is the most explicit and the closest to what a mathematical >>definition could be that I have ever heard. >> >>Can you give a better definition yourself ? >> >>Who is going to argue that the program that has the best knowledge about chess >>is the program that wins more games than the other ones ??? >> >>What other way of measurement are you thinking about ? >> >>If we were talking about humans, wouldn't you agree that the player who has the >>best knowledge about chess is the one that wins more games? >> >> >> >> Christophe > >I think that comp-comp is about ply-depth (the program with the deeper depth >generally wins). I do not think that the deeper depth is defined. Programs use different extensions rules and different pruning rules. > In human-comp playing style, strategic understanding, and >having the initiative are the main items and that ply-depth comes after that. programs can see strategic good moves by deeper ply-depth. Uri
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.