Author: Albert Silver
Date: 12:51:31 07/14/00
Go up one level in this thread
On July 13, 2000 at 17:05:46, Christophe Theron wrote:
>On July 13, 2000 at 08:53:22, Jari Huikari wrote:
>
>>On July 12, 2000 at 14:02:16, Christophe Theron wrote:
>>
>>>Well you are right, but it is a proven fact that a K6-2 450MHz has much more
>>>chess knowledge than a 486dx2-66MHz has.
>>
>>>If you don't like the above idea and don't want to consider CPU speed as being
>>>part of the "knowledge", then your remark does not refute my definition...
>>
>>A good common definition for knowledge is hard to find. CPU speed is not
>>programmed into a chess program, which the original question was about.
>>
>>Knowledge IMHO is some piece of information somehow included into code.
>>Program knows something is good without having to do a deep search to
>>find it out.
>> Jari
>
>
>What you are saying here is that knowledge can only be found in the evaluation
>function. I think this is totally wrong. A lot of chess knowledge is in the
>search itself.
>
>
> Christophe
Sort of. I agree that many decisions are determined by the search, and often, as
a player, I will work by process of elmination in order to play a move. In other
words (this is common practice) I will analyze moves and discard them until I
hit on the one that does the job. I may be able to then justify it by positional
rationalizations, but essentially, the decision came out of pure calculation.
While there is no question that the search (calculating) is a huge part of the
decision making process, I wouldn't call this knowledge.
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.