Author: Uri Blass
Date: 03:36:41 08/01/01
Go up one level in this thread
On August 01, 2001 at 06:21:32, José de Jesús García Ruvalcaba wrote: >On August 01, 2001 at 02:01:45, Uri Blass wrote: > >>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 > >I think that the biggest advantage of humans over computers is that their >"selective search" is a lot better. >José. I agree that it is also one of the advantage in some positions but I am not sure if it is always an advantage. Humans can sometimes prune good moves because of this "advantage". I am not sure if humans can beat chessmaster in finding mates (even if they had the same speed) without changing their algorithm. I suspect that humans are going to fail to prove in 24 hours some mates that chessmaster can find in less than 1 second. 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.