Author: Uri Blass
Date: 22:07:44 11/18/00
Go up one level in this thread
On November 18, 2000 at 22:05:39, Peter Kappler wrote: >On November 18, 2000 at 21:30:38, Christophe Theron wrote: > >>On November 18, 2000 at 20:39:44, Fernando Villegas wrote: >> >>>On November 18, 2000 at 20:19:12, Will Singleton wrote: >>> >>>>On November 18, 2000 at 19:05:56, Christophe Theron wrote: >>>> >>>>>On November 18, 2000 at 14:03:31, Ed Schröder wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On November 18, 2000 at 12:50:40, Hermano Ecuadoriano wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On November 18, 2000 at 12:33:37, Ed Schröder wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>On November 18, 2000 at 08:40:36, Arshad Syed wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Fritz and Junior completely anhilated their opponents in the KC human-machine >>>>>>>>>challenge. Junior played some remarkable human-esque chess in a couple of its >>>>>>>>>games. One of them was a gem, where DJ disregards pawn material and instead >>>>>>>>>launches a ferocious attack on the kingside. The only other computer game that >>>>>>>>>was so human-like was the Hiarcs-Deen Hergott match which involved a >>>>>>>>>Queen/Knight sacrifice by the computer. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>All this and hardly any mention in this NG, except for a handful of >>>>>>>>>congratulatory messages. I mean I have seen much longer and more animated >>>>>>>>>discussions for lesser quality comp-human games on the ICC, with moves being >>>>>>>>>discussed in microscopic detail. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>...and finally, there was this thread on the US electoral system which possibly >>>>>>>>>was the longest and most elaborately discussed in recent weeks. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Regards, >>>>>>>>>Arshad >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>I have wondered myself too. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>In a mailing I have announced a 6-game match against computer killer >>>>>>>>GM v/d Wiel and got about zero response. What to do? Cancel it? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Ed >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Your Rebels are partly responsible for this! >>>>>>>Everyone remembers Rebel 10-Anand! >>>>>>>Thanks for the games against strong humans. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Here is an idea: >>>>>>>Hold the match "live" at some slow time control. >>>>>>>Do not tell the viewers which is the computer. >>>>>>>Conduct a live, running poll, asking which is which. >>>>>>>Reveal the answer after the game. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>This would be like a Turing test, and it might be feasable now. >>>>>>>I think those whose programs are said to be human-like, should >>>>>>>risk it! It would be interesting! >>>>>> >>>>>>Very nice idea indeed! >>>>>> >>>>>>Ed >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>Yes, yes, a thousand times YES! >>>>> >>>>>Let's see if people are able to guess who is human, who is program! >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Christophe >>>> >>>>Wouldn't work. Immediate moves from pondering would give it away. Perhaps you >>>>could disable pondering, or at least not move immediately? >>>> >>>>Will >>> >>>Disable? It is enough to deliver the moves above a minimal time, say, two >>>minutes, even if the program answered in no time. >>>Fernando >> >> >> >>Absolutely. This would not take away anything from the thrill of the game. >> >> >> >> Christophe > > >But what happens when there is a 2-minute pause for an obviously forced >recapture? > >--Peter It is possible to get always 2 minutes delay for every move even if the human play the obvious move(I assume tournamrnt time control of 120/40). Another idea is simply to tell the spectators about a move exactly every 3 minutes when it is not important if it is a computer move or a human move(in order to do it you must use a delay of an hour to be practically sure that you can do it because I do not expect the human to get to a big time trouble in the opening and big time trouble after move 20 is no problem). The only problem is that I guess that spectators who analyze the game with their Century3 will have no problem to identify the machine. Uri
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.