Author: Don Dailey
Date: 10:00:57 12/14/97
Go up one level in this thread
>I remember Fritz5 play a beautiful combination in Den Haag against >Karpov. >Karsten was the operator. When Fritz played this combination any of us >was breathless. Only Karpov looked astonished to the board. And than you >could see a smile on his face. YES, the combination worked, but the >END-POSITION WAS A TECHNICALLY LOST ENDGAME. >Thats the problem with Fritz. It finds something using the SEARCH but >has no idea about HOW to evaluate the END-POSITION. I think a few years ago, the only thing that mattered was tactics in computer chess. The programs had to see past various horizon affect problems and survive simple tactics just to be in the game at all. Even when it looked like they were getting good tactically, a simply threat or two could push everything beyond their horizon. So good positional play helped, but was a minor factor in their success. But the right formula for computer chess, in my humble opinion, will be very fast searchers that are as smart as you can make them! This sounds so obvious I do not know why it's even debated. And it seems to me that the cream of the crop best programs are following this formula very closely! But it's getting harder and harder to avoid the evaluation part. I once believed that as programs became faster, knowledge would matter less. But I now believe just the opposite. My eyes have been opened! It's getting harder to beat anyone tactically, most programs easily steer their way around the crap and what is left, is which program understands the deeper issues best. But this is a really exciting time for us! We will soon be able to write programs that are better than the best human players. I think we almost have enough hardware now, but we need smarter programs to really do it right. But I also believe there is a long way to go past this. I believe Kasparov is not that close to being the ultimate player, although he may be the best human (maybe even best human ever.) At some point, computer programs will exist that can CONSISTANTLY beat all the best human players. This means computer chess will be alive for a long time and the emphasis will be on which program rules. -- Don
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.