Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 14:34:28 12/15/01
Go up one level in this thread
On December 15, 2001 at 12:30:07, Will Singleton wrote: >On December 15, 2001 at 11:44:53, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On December 15, 2001 at 03:12:43, K. Burcham wrote: >> >>> >>> >>>if some here say that they dont want to play against someone that >>>is moving manually (changes time to move during game), >>>then it seems that the program time control could be improved for an increase in >>>strength. >> >> >>That isn't the issue. It is "human interference" that is the issue. A fully >>automatic program (on a chess server) has to make _all_ decisions by itself. >>How much time to use, when to think longer, when to play quicker, etc. A >>manually operated program will have help. And with a good human operator, >>that help can be the "edge" needed to beat an automatic program. IE when >>the program finds a move that the human is sure is "ok" he can hit "move >>now" and save time. Or even prevent the program from thinking longer and >>switching to a "worse" move. >> >>time usage isn't really the issue, it is "outside help". >> > >That's true, but both the "move now" button and the "don't make that stupid >move" button can be used even on a fully automatic program. Can't control for >that. > >But I do think it's important to kib analysis, for later study. > >Will How would you say "don't make that move"?? IE for a manual program, at reasonably long time controls, manual operators typically put the program on "infinite analysis" and force moves when they are ready. If a move is stupid, they let it think longer. And some will outright overrule the program and force something it would not normally play.
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.