Author: Uri Blass
Date: 23:01:45 07/31/01
Go up one level in this thread
On August 01, 2001 at 01:44:33, Dann Corbit wrote: >On August 01, 2001 at 01:40:03, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On July 31, 2001 at 18:49:37, Dann Corbit wrote: >> >>>On July 31, 2001 at 18:36:53, Otello Gnaramori wrote: >>> >>>><snip> >>>>Franz Morsch saying the main difference between this version of Fritz compared >>>>to its predecessors did not lie so much in greater chess knowledge but more due >>>>to the machines newfound ability to deal with anti-computer chess strategy, and >>>>to learn from its mistakes. He also said that he believed that this incarnation >>>>of Fritz is every bit as strong as the Deep Blue II that defeated Kasparov and >>>>has far greater "chess knowledge". >>>><snip> >>> >>>For a machine with many thousands of tunable chess parameters, carefully >>>adjusted by teams of programmers and GM's >> >> >>carefully adjusted by programmers and GM's? >>I doubt it. > >The programmers first used a gradient method, which was based upon thousands of >GM games. Then, individual parameters were hand-tuned by the GM's advice. I doubt if using GM's games to adjust the evaluation is a good idea. I also doubt if GM's advise for parameters is a good idea because I believe that the GM's do not think in the numbers of computers in games. The GM's have not time to calculate evaluation in the computer way and I do not think the advantage of GM's against computer is because of a better static evaluation. The advantage of humans against computers is their ability to think and change their evaluation during the game and the ability to plan that is not about evaluation. 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.