Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Some Philosophical questions on the limits of Computer chess

Author: Sune Fischer

Date: 05:56:57 01/26/02

Go up one level in this thread


On January 26, 2002 at 08:54:10, Sune Fischer wrote:

>>You're presuming that anything other than one move, the best move, will lose
>>forcibly to best play. I believe that more than one move is available to a
>>non-loss thus perfect play would be often a flip of the coin between a few
>>(perhaps three as I hypothesized in another post in the thread) moves. I have
>>seen no evidence to suggest there is only one path to a non-loss and that a
>>single path of perfect play is needed to avoid it. Everything we know whether
>>from personal research or from the current tablebases suggests there are several
>>paths. If this were accepted to be true, the question would be whether the 2800
>>player is incapable of hitting on _one_ of these non-losing moves (according to
>>perfect play).
>>
>>                                      Albert
>
>You could interpet in an similar way; there is a 50% chance of the 2800 chooses
>a move that is *good enough*.
>It was just an estimate, probably way off :)
>
>Suppose that a *correct* move is done with 95% certainty (on average) and that
>the average game length is only 60 moves, then he has a 0.95^60 = 4.6% chance of
>a draw!
>
>This is perhaps more realistic?
>
>-S.

Some one suggested an actual test of this percentile by letting a 2800 play
against the table bases, not a bad idea I think.

-S.



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.