Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 20:11:24 12/27/01
Go up one level in this thread
On December 27, 2001 at 20:12:02, Tom Kerrigan wrote:
>On December 27, 2001 at 13:10:08, Christophe Theron 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.
>>
>>
>>
>>That's the problem, I do not know either.
>>
>>But the reason we know that there is another way of playing chess is because
>>human chess players have a "NPS" that is a very small fraction of todays
>>computers NPS. The best human players only look at 1/100000 of the nodes a
>>computer looks at in order to play a move of comparable quality.
>
>I have always believed that this "human NPS" stuff is a load of crap.
>
>I do not play chess well and I'm not close with anybody who does play chess
>particularly well, but the idea that a human would "visit" distinct "nodes" to
>"search" for a good move strikes me as absurd. Maybe this is what strong humans
>actually do, but I have a hard time believing that.
>
>-Tom
I think that's what they do, but the problem is that they visit probably more
nodes "inconsciently".
So the order of magnitude of the human NPS is not very well established. It can
be in the order of 10 if you count the nodes the player knows he has visited,
but it could be in the order of 100 to 1000 with the ones he has visited without
actually knowing it.
But anyway, this number is still 100 to 1000 times smaller than the NPS of
todays PCs.
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.