Author: David Dory
Date: 02:27:47 04/11/02
Go up one level in this thread
>On April 10, 2002 at 23:18:42, K. Burcham wrote: >it is one thing to be able to take each move of game two and game six, and find >at least one program that will play the Deep Blue move. > >it is another to find a bad move that Deep Blue played, and find a program >today that will avoid this move and play a better move, and watch the eval >climb. > >what if we all agreed that one certain position that Deep Blue played >was a bad move because_______? > >what if we find a program today that does not play this same bad move? > >what if we find a program that will play a better move and we can watch eval >climb after this move? > >I know Robert, that in this case you could answer "well if a frog had wings, >etc". > >but i assure you these are honest questions. >what if the above did happen, what could we conclude? >kburcham Honest questions deserve honest answers. You know as well as everyone here, that even after 25 full games, an honest strength evaluation of a program can get STARTED. What could we conclude from a few moves from DB? That's Easy - frogs really CAN'T fly, even if you glue little wings on them. <grin> Seriously, how could you or I judge the real value of the moves made by the computer that beat the highest rated player of all time? Not just in ONE game, but in a whole match contest? Trying to evalu8 deep blue is like trying to get those frogs to fly - it just doesn't get off the ground. <pardon the pun> If the programs start beating the very top GM's in important matches, with money on the line to be won and lost - Then I'll believe the current programs/computers are as good as DB was, because they will have done what only DB has been able to do so far. Dave ** No frogs were harmed during the posting of this message!
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.