Author: K. Burcham
Date: 19:10:44 12/27/01
Go up one level in this thread
Does anyone have any opinions on Which programs play the Most like a Human Grandmaster in terms of strategy and Tactics? I am aware that Computers do not have the Understanding of Chess that Grandmasters have, but what programs are able to simulate Grandmaster Play the Most? Will Bundy first i would like to quote Chris. > "Software programs typically use a wide band width brute force search, >combined with an in depth search for tactically active lines" Christophe i wont say that todays programs can win every game with a GM. because we know they cant. but i also know that a GM cannot win every game with any of several of todays top programs. to answer your question: "I am aware that GM's do not have the Understanding of Chess that todays top programs have. which GM's are able to simulate Program play the Most? well i do not think at this point it matters. the leading programs are all running in a tight pack. it seems this pack is more than capable of holding its own against any GM. it also seems that if you are building your first program, and you want it to be the strongest program of all time, then you cannot model this program after GM or super GM play. these are the best in our world, but the GM and super GM blunder, play into positions they do not understand, constantly lose positional advantage, lose material, miss mates, cannot play some common endings, and more. so why are you worried about our programs modeling GM play? i am glad they dont. i do not think a programmer should try to get his program to play tactics or strategy similiar to a GM. people here are constantly posting difficult GM positions that our programs sometimes cannot solve. but!!! we can find thousands of games with thousands of positions that the GM played the losing move. take the last big GM tournament. play through each game and see why each game was lost by a GM or super GM. many many postions are misunderstood by the GM. many positions a GM plays into and does not know he is playing into a losing position until it is too late. i do not want any of my programs playing like any human GM or human super GM. we all know why kramnik wanted to study the program before his upcoming comp vs super GM match. just this fact in itself tells us that the super GM knows he can very easily lose to any of todays top programs. so kramnik will study its play and look for positions the program will not understand. once found he will use these to an advantage in the match. there are several here that say todays programs cannot play GM level. but i have a very strong opinion, that if there is a tournament consisting of 12 of the top Grandmasters, and including in this tournament is 12 of todays top programs, there would not be a program in last place. several of these programs would finish toward the top. and i would not be surprised if it was won by a program. and i would not be surprised at all if the last five places were GM. dont get me wrong, i would "mow the yard" for any GM or super GM. i would carry his luggage, and polish his shoes. i would make an ice run for his coke and bourbon. no problem. but i dont want my program to play like a GM or super GM. i like my programs very much. and i want my programs to improve. and my programs will improve. they always do. but i want my programs to stay programs. i do not want my programs to play like a GM or a super GM. when programs start to play like humans, i will update my racing software, update my chassis library, warm up on my round track chassis technology again, get on someones payroll and go back to racing. kburcham
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.