Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 13:22:49 08/29/01
Go up one level in this thread
On August 29, 2001 at 16:16:06, Mark Young wrote: >On August 29, 2001 at 15:36:54, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On August 29, 2001 at 15:21:09, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On August 29, 2001 at 14:41:48, Mark Young wrote: >>> >>>>On August 29, 2001 at 14:03:49, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>> >>>>>On August 29, 2001 at 13:52:33, Uri Blass wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On August 29, 2001 at 12:52:15, Roy Eassa wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>This sentence DOES say a lot, doesn't it: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>"By the summer of 1990--by which time three of the original Deep Thought team >>>>>>>had joined IBM--Deep Thought had achieved a 50 percent score in 10 games played >>>>>>>under tournament conditions against grandmasters and an 86 percent score in 14 >>>>>>>games against international masters." >>>>>>> >>>>>>>That was 7 years before, and many-fold slower hardware (and much weaker >>>>>>>software, no doubt), than what played Kasparov in 1997. >>>>>> >>>>>>No >>>>>>This sentence tells me nothing new. >>>>>> >>>>>>I know that humans at that time did not know how to play against computers like >>>>>>they know today. >>>>>> >>>>>>Today programs got clearly better results than deep thought >>>>>>and there is more than one case when they got >2700 performance inspite of >>>>>>the fact that the opponents could buy the program they played against them >>>>>>something that Deep thought's opponents could not do. >>>>> >>>>>Deep thought produced a rating of 2655 over 25 consecutive games against a >>>>>variety of opponents. None of them were "inexperienced" in playing against >>>>>computers. Byrne. Larson. Browne. You-name-it. That argument doesn't hold >>>>>up under close scrutiny. >>>> >>>>In some ways, it appears that the GMs of today are >>>>>prepared far worse than the GMs of 1992 were prepared to play computers. >>>> >>>> >>>>I don?t see how GM?s of today are less prepared to play computers. Anyone of >>>>them can and has played computer programs at home stronger then the programs of >>>>the early 1990?s. >>> >>>I am basing that on the games I have seen, plus the important detail that in >>>1992, strong GM players at the US Open, the World Open, and other events >>>(particularly those in the northeast US) knew they would be facing Hitech, >>>Deep Thought, and at times, Belle and others. Since 1995 this has not been >>>the case as it is nearly impossible to find a tournament in the US that will >>>allow a computer to compete. If they aren't going to face the machines, they >>>aren't going to study them. >>> >>> >>>> >>>>I don?t think preparation is the problem. It is the strength of the programs of >>>>today. It seems if you are not in the top 100 of the Fide list your chances of >>>>besting the better programs is not very good. >>>> >>>>It seems clear that the programs of today are stronger then Deep Thought of 1992 >>>>that produced a rating of 2655 playing against "Byrne. Larson. Browne. >>>>You-name-it". Do you agree with this? >>> >>> >>>No I don't. I would agree that probably they programs of today are in the >>>same league with Deep Thought of 1992, maybe. At least on the 8-way boxes. >>>Their NPS speed would be similar. Deep Thought wasn't known to be an incredibly >>>"smart" program, neither are today's programs. >> >> >>I consider the top programs of today as clearly smarter than Deep thought. >> >>Deep thought had also a problem in the repetition detection and I believe that >>the search algorithm of the top programs of today is superior because Deep >>thought did not use null move or other pruning methods. > >I agree, and there are many games to play over that show todays programs are >much smarter and faster then Deep Thought of 1992. Even without a 8-way box. To >me it is clear that preparation is not the problem, as any GM can play much >stronger programs then Deep Thought, Hitech, Etc. of the 1980's and early >1990's. And it has already been suggested as fact all programs have the same >fundamental weaknesses. So playing any top program or studying any old Deep >Thought games should be the only preparation needed. As this is the only prep >the early GM's had when facing Deep Thought. > >BTW. I don't understand how we take as fact that "Byrne. Larson. Browne. >You-name-it" prepared for their games with computers, but any of today's GM's >that know their playing computers and also lose don't prepare for their games. > >How does Bob and other know what kind of preparation past or present GM's do >when they know they are facing a computer program. Perhaps we ask? I know several that will answer. > >If Fritz 7 does happen to win its match with GM Kramnik we better not here one >word about GM Kramnik not being prepared for the match, as we heard with the >Deep Fritz Vs GM Huebner match, Chess Tigers great win in Argentine, and Deep >Junior's 2700+ TPR at Dortmund Etc. > >> >>Uri
This page took 0.01 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.