Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 10:47:31 12/12/01
Go up one level in this thread
On December 12, 2001 at 12:19:56, José de Jesús García Ruvalcaba wrote:
>On December 12, 2001 at 11:34:09, Christophe Theron wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>I'm not saying that chess knowledge accounts for nothing. I just dispute the
>>fact that chess experts have chess knowledge:
>>1) that would be useful for a chess program
>>2) that a weak player like me cannot either find by itself or find around him
>>(by asking to better players or finding it in books)
>>
>>I'm doing chess programming since a long time and I don't think I would have
>>benefited much from a grandmaster by my side, if I had been given the
>>opportunity to have one.
>>
>>And as I have said many times, I even believe that a gransmaster involved in a
>>chess programming team would be counter productive.
>>
>
>I think that depends how you use the grandmaster. As opponents they can still
>defeat the programs and the programmers can learn from the games (even if the
>machine wins). Some 20 years ago they were a lot stronger than the machines, at
>that time I think any computer-chess team would have found productive to play
>against grandmasters.
>I.e. what the grandmaster does really well is to play chess, let her/him play
>against your program (but they usually charge some money).
>José.
Right. They are useful because they have playing strength. Not because they can
explain how to achieve playing strength, because they either cannot explain, or
we cannot make good use of their knowledge.
Christophe
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.