Author: Chris Carson
Date: 07:36:47 04/30/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 30, 2001 at 10:15:16, Uri Blass wrote: >On April 30, 2001 at 10:01:09, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On April 30, 2001 at 07:22:24, Alvaro Polo wrote: >> >>>Hello all, >>> >>>In a recent interview Kramnik states that "We are in a very interesting phase, >>>when the strength of the best GMs and that of the best chess engines run by the >>>best processors are about equal." >>> >>>I know that this point (machines being GM strenght or nor) has been debated >>>again and again and I don't intend to post a troll. I would just like to know if >>>the consensus now among chess programmers is wether Kramnik is right or not. For >>>instance, I remember Bob Hyatt saying that computers are really 2450, etc. But >>>software evolves, CPU power evolves and perhaps now there is agreement that >>>machines are finally GM strenght? >>> >>>Thanks. >>> >>>Alvaro Polo >> >> >>I personally think my estimate is still pretty close. Computers have two >>serious problems: >> >>1. opening books. They depend on a human to "play the game" of choosing good >>and bad openings. This leaves them highly vulnerable to opening preparation and >>traps. Particularly when you practice against one copy and then play another >>copy which doesn't have the 'learning' from the practice games. > >I think it is unfair to use this way to decide about the level of chess >programs. > >I am more interested to know the results of programs when the opponent cannot >get a copy of the program. > >When Deep thought and Deep blue played against humans the opponents could not >get a copy of the program so I see no reason to let them to get a copy of the >programs before the game. > >I think that letting the opponent to get a copy before the match should be >allowed only after programs can prove that they can beat the best humans without >giving them a copy before the match. > >Uri Uri, I am amazed that the Best Human player can not show up for a chess match and just play his/her best game against the computer. Thats what I do when I open up the program (or download it) for the first time. ;) The only reason I can imagine is to guarantee a dominating victory. Not much of a contest if you ask me. I would be more interested (as a consumer of sw/hw) in a match with a top 20 GM vs any program/hw with no unfair preparation. If any of the commercial programmers read this, have a match like this with the final cut of the sw just before release, have the match, then release the program. SSDF (ELH and other rating lists), major comp vs comp events and comp vs GM results are what I am interested in. To me, chess is chess, let the better comp or GM win. ;) Just my plug nickel input. ;) Best Regards, Chris Carson
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.