Author: Uri Blass
Date: 01:28:26 12/16/01
Go up one level in this thread
On December 15, 2001 at 23:46:53, Russell Reagan wrote: >On December 15, 2001 at 11:44:53, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>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". > >I read upcoming CCT4 is 60 seconds per move, which I understand to mean that you >get 60 seconds to make each and every move. I never read about a tournament with the rules that you suggest. I know no commercial program that support time control of exactly x secnds per move. It is more likely that you get 60 seconds in the clock after every move. So if a human operator chose to make >his program "move now", he's only wasting extra search time. He doesn't get to >carry over that extra time. That is assuming I understand the rules correctly. I >do not see why this is an issue in a tournament where there is a set number of >seconds per move. In a tournament where there was a sudden death time control or >a standard X moves in N time, then this could be a legitimate complaint, but >seeing as how a program can't gain an advantage by wasting time that it doesn't >get back, I don't see how this could be an advantage. And unless you're a GM, I >don't see how any human is going to interfere with their program's moves. I >can't beat any computer program that I've played on it's strongest level. I >would think that any human who interfered with their program's play would almost >surely lose any game in which the human chose his/her own move over the >computers, considering the quality of most of the programs in the tournament, >and the percentile you'd have to be ranked in the world to be better than your >"run of the mill master level program". Then again, maybe I misunderstood the >rules :) > >Russell The fact that the operator is losing against the program does not mean that the operator cannot improve the game of the program. The operator need to change the moves of the program only in special situations when the operator knows that the program does a mistake. The operator may lose in a game against the program because of mistakes in different positions. I also see programs calculate when the move to play is forced so even if I assume that it is the rules that you suggest of exactly 60 seconds per move the operator may earn by analyzing the position after some forced moves for more time instead of analyzing obvious positions. 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.