Author: Tom Kerrigan
Date: 01:48:03 12/27/01
Go up one level in this thread
On December 27, 2001 at 04:20:23, Uri Blass wrote: >On December 27, 2001 at 02:13:34, Tom Kerrigan wrote: > >>On December 26, 2001 at 17:47:12, Christophe Theron wrote: >> >>>I don't think so, but I think at some point the only way to improve will be to >>>incorporate a way for the program to learn without the programmer, to remember >>>its experience and improve on it, and to adapt its play to its opponent. >> >>I don't see this as likely because of the numbers involved. >> >>For a computer to recognize features, it has to loop over them. And there might >>as well be an infinite number of features possible on a chess board, so that >>loop is going to take a while. >> >>The human brain is sloppy and bad at this task, so maybe there's some way to do >>sloppy and bad learning that does better than what we have now, but I wouldn't >>know how to go about that. >> >>-Tom > >I think that there is already a possible way to do a program >that is learning without the programmer. > >Even a program that is using only a piece square table >is using a lot of numbers in the evaluation. Optimizing a set of eval weights is a solved problem in my mind. (See TD learning and KnightCap.) What I was referring to (and Cristophe, too, I believe) is a program that would come up with its own eval terms. -Tom
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.