Author: Uri Blass
Date: 10:58:20 04/30/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 30, 2001 at 11:10:29, Robert Hyatt wrote: >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. > >Then don't give them a copy. But what happens in a 24+ game match? The >computer does well at the beginning, but by the end has horrendous problems >as the human discovers its weaknesses. > >you only have to watch on ICC to see this happen against _all_ programs, by >top IM and GM players... > > > >> >>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. > >You don't need a copy of the program to bust it. You only need to prepare >openings that against _other_ programs produce advantages. Some traps are >quite easy to spring when you know your opponent is a computer and will likely >take any pawn that is offered. It is not so simple Junior sacrificed material in the games against Fritz and it is not going to take any pawn that is offered if it plays against kramnik. 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.