Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 16:51:11 07/15/00
Go up one level in this thread
On July 15, 2000 at 19:41:50, blass uri wrote: [snip] >I agree that everything is possible but the probability that I get wrong >conclusions is so small that practically I assume that it is right. I agree also that the coin experiment analogy is carried too far, and that is another problem with the model. Chess is a game that is almost purely a function of information. The defeats of Deep Junior have provided information that was missing before the contest began. If we repeated the same experiment next week, will the outcome be the same? Maybe, but I think the GM's have gained valuable insight and Deep Junior won't gain additional ability until Amir can program and test the algorithms. Hence, unlike the coin toss, each previous trial *does* alter the outcome of the next trial. And not in favor of the computer.
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.