Author: Pham Minh Tri
Date: 22:46:06 05/03/01
Hi friends, Some recent posts raise some interesting questions to me: What is chess the problem and has it been solved or not? Many people believe that we can not solve the chess problem because of exponential cost and can only approximate the solutions, which is good enough. However, we have not been given clear and unique definitions of the chess problem and of what is a solution. If you give me one, the answer would probably be different. I think, with almost all definitions, we can be happy to say, the chess problem was solved (or been solved in this year). For example: Some old books (actually, I did not read about their definitions but could infer from them) define a chess problem in that with any given positions of chess, we would know the results and how to defeat (or draw) the opponent. I am sure those problems were solved with some evidence: 1) Opening positions: To me, any good chess programs of people in this club could beat me easily all games, even if I play the white or black side. The situation is the same with almost all people in the world (as they may be beaten by the best chess programs). With some top players like Garry, the DB has beaten him since 1997 in an __old__ computer. I think with the best computer nowadays (note that I mention any kinds of computer, not only PC), which may be 1000 times as fast as DB, and a huge additional knowledge of 4 years, they could beat any GMs. 2) Endgames: our software (in general), knew how to solve them all. This post is just for fun, to bring you a little more energy and optimism. Please do not take too seriously when discussing here :-)) Have a good weekend, Pham
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.