Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: computer learning

Author: Tom Kerrigan

Date: 01:20:57 07/30/00

Go up one level in this thread


On July 29, 2000 at 14:07:33, walter irvin wrote:

>computer learning should be the next leap .you can tweek your chess engines
>until you are blue in the face , maybe get 20 or 30 elo .or wait til faster
>hardware saves you .but if programmers want real elo gain 200 -300 then this is
>the way .egtb has helped BUT alot of those positions the computer would have won
>any way ,or the computer gets beat before the end game is reached .
>
>the oppening is where the game is won or lost at the highest level .computers
>SHOULD be way ahead of people in this area .a program should NEVER have to spend
>time thinking on a position that it has played before AND never lost .also
>anti-GM should be easy ?? create 5 different engine settings all good but with
>vastly diff playing styles .when anti-gm is selected the program generates a
>series of random nums between 1 and 5 .thats the order the diff styles or engine
>settings would get played .you could also have the program return a random
>number between 3 - 12 . that would be the number of moves each engine would get
>to play before the next engine takes over .to me its stupid to play a GM a game
>when:::play your program figure out exact moves to crunch you .this way it would
>be very hard to reproduce a game to beat you .also anti-GM should only contain
>oppenings that are wide oppen if possible .

I think that everything you discuss here has been implemented (in spirit) by at
least on program.

-Tom



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.