Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Computer haters?: No, you are realistic!

Author: Amir Ban

Date: 05:22:18 07/19/00

Go up one level in this thread


On July 19, 2000 at 01:11:55, Ed Schröder wrote:

>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
>

Junior roots are in preprocessing, and it was a preprocessor until '94. I do
something better now.

With your huge experience, do you seriously believe that a program on Junior's
level can be a preprocessor ?

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.