Author: Ed Schröder
Date: 22:11:55 07/18/00
Go up one level in this thread
On July 18, 2000 at 19:10:46, Amir Ban wrote: >On July 18, 2000 at 14:05:46, Jeroen Noomen wrote: > >>On July 18, 2000 at 09:29:12, Amir Ban wrote: >> >>Amir, >> >>I agree that Junior earned its points honestly. I also agree with most you write >>about these games. Still, you don't point out anything about the losses against >>Kramnik and Piket. And that was exactly what I had in mind writing this thread. >>Those two games showed exactly where chess computer programs still can be >>improved. And HAVE to be improved, otherwise human GM's will have good chances >>to get more points next year. And they will, because they have learnt. >> >>IMO if you solve most of the problems about king's attacks and closed positions, >>then it will be almost impossible for the strongest GM's ta beat a computer. >>Because in that case they have no advantage in any type of position anymore. But >>in 2000 there is still not much to be done when a clever player manages to block >>the position or start a slow attack: The programs do not know about this and >>only human mistakes will save them. >> >>So the crucial question is: When will one of the leading programmer stop >>searching for higher NPS, better searching techniques etc? When somebody will >>REALLY tackle the 2 problems I mentioned? Because otherwise a computer can still >>be beaten in 2010, running on 500 GHz. But as I already mentioned: This is the >>computerchess paradox: NOBODY wants to sac NPS for more knowledge. And as long >>as nobody wants to quit this 'rule', human GM's are still superior in knowledge >>and understanding of the game. >> >>Jeroen >> > >The speed vs. knowledge dilemma is a false one. Wow.. now that's a statement. >It may apply to Rebel and other programs, but it doesn't apply to >Junior, where I have a framework to code evaluation stuff virtually >for free. Let me guess, pre-processing...? Ed >Speed is not the issue here, anyway, I agree. Fritz is often quicker in spotting >the disaster, but that usually doesn't help it to avoid it. By most accounts, >it's easier to drag Fritz than Junior into disaster-prone games. > >There are relatively simple ways to avoid blocked positions that are usually >effective. One of them is assymetric evaluation (another is opening >preparation). However I don't like artificial constructions in my program and I >prefer to work on improving the evaluation to correct its weak points rather >than evade them. > >Amir
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.