Author: Mogens Larsen
Date: 08:48:59 10/18/00
Go up one level in this thread
On October 18, 2000 at 10:01:58, Thorsten Czub wrote: >I DO INTERPRET ? > >mogens: do you have a brain ? i guess so. >now : do you see the world outside ? i guess so. >can it be that you INTERPRET the world outside with your brain ? >could be , or ? > >now: ANYTHING is interpretation. there is nothing OBJECTIVE that cannot >be seen without subjective interpretation of human brains. > >show me a thing that is NOT interpreted by human brains. >if you find something let me know. than i would call this a new information. Of course everything is interpretation, but there are correct interpretations and there are wrong interpretations. In this case your interpretation contradicts the factual basis on which the data is created. To be precise. You can't invent a interpretation when you know it contradicts the abilities of the subject itself. Human beings can't fly, jumping from a tall building interpreting your arms as wings won't help. The principal variation of a knowledge based program isn't a plan. It's a calculation like the one performed by "bean counters". Only difference is the addition or altering of specific variables and parameters. Nothing more and nothing less. The moves might appear more sensible and intelligent, because the choice of move is based on more information. That doesn't mean planning at all, just a more educated guess. The programmer stipulate preferred values by adding parameters. The program just calculates accordingly. In fact you could argue that longterm plans demands accuracy, not speculative evaluation. Speculative evaluation could be defined as the destroyer of "plans". Does this mean that "bean counters" are constructing plans through accuracy? No, it doesn't. There are no specific goals or intentions to reached by planning, only calculation. >:-))) paradigms get changed themselves. the old dinosaurs die out, >and new paradigm come automatically. you cannot stop this. I have no such intentions. I prefer intelligent programs myself, but the diversity makes it more interesting to watch. Both speculative and accurate evaluation has its merits. Ignoring one or the other would be stupid. >I think it fits pretty well for me to like knowledge-based and >intelligent-chess programs, because i don`t like bean-counter programs that play >silly. You're probably right. Those without knowledge seek it. Happy hunting THORsten. Regards, Mogens
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.