Author: Uri Blass
Date: 10:37:12 04/17/02
Go up one level in this thread
On April 17, 2002 at 13:09:48, Allen Lake wrote: >>It is ok for smirin to use the chessbase opening book to prepare but it is also >>okay for the programmers to change the opening book. > >Agreed, since there appears to have been no agreement between the parties >preventing them from changing the opening books. However, I would personally >like to see a programming team take on a match where their opening book was >freely available to their opponent. > >>If giving a GM access to the opening book of a program is fair then it is also >>fair to give the humans who play against smirin all the information about the >>opening preperations of smirin before he play against them. > >Don't want to belabor the obvious, but human-human and human-computer matches >are subject to completely different rules. Is it fair that a substantial >portion of brain and nervous system activity in a human is devoted to regulating >and maintaining the life of that human -- breathing, heartbeat, movement, etc -- >so that not all of the potential brain power could be focused on calculating >variations? Wouldn't it be more fair to the GM if we forced the chess engine to >spend an equivalent percentage of its thinking time to maintaining the health of >the local computer system -- scanning the system for viruses, perhaps? > >Seriously, though, because of the nature of the two opponents, only a portion of >the accepted OTB rules of the game are applicable (after all, was it really >possible for Shredder or Hiarcs to commit a touch-move error?), so your >comparison above was, in my view, a "straw man". > > >>I think that chess is a game that nobody should know the opening preperation of >>the opponent. > >Once again, presumed in human-human matches, but negotiable in human-computer >matches. > >>You can also ask the following question: >>If humans need unfair means like getting the opening book and the opening >>preperation of the opponents(something that they never get against humans), >>does not this say enough about how far GM's are from actually equalling the >>ability of computers? > >To borrow a phrase, "unfair" lies in the eyes of the beholder. I think a case >could be made that opening books are an "unfair" advantage for computer programs >against humans. Why? Because they allow the program to minimize its usage of >calculation time (a limited resource) in the early stages of the game, when the >size of the tree of potential moves is rapidly expanding. The opening book >prunes the search tree at precisely the time when it is most advantageous to the >computer to reduce the size of the search tree. The time saved at this point >can then be used with greater effect later in the game, when the search tree is >much narrower (leading to greater search depth). Combine this with endgame >tablebases, which provide perfect lines of play with small numbers of pieces, >and you may find that the first 25 percent(or more) of the game and the last 10 >percent (or more) of the game have been reduced to database lookups of >precalculated data rather than calculation of new data, precisely at the points >where it is most advantageous for the program to have them. Is that really >"playing" chess? > >For the sake of argument, I propose the following match conditions: the >computer program of your choice on the hardware platform of your choice, but >without opening books or endgame tablebases. The opponent: any GM of your >choice, playing blindfolded. > >Who do _you_ place your money on? And why? I will put the money on the program if the GM has no access to the program before the match. I do not think that opening book is so important and it is important mainly against preperation of the opponent. My weak program plays(no hash tables,no pondering,no null move pruning) plays in the 5th division without opening book and has no problems to beat programs with opening book. I know that at least in comp-comp games book is not very important and I found that even bad moves like 1.f3 that get a lot of programs out of book give practical chances for a win(it is based on games that I made few years ago between Fritz5 and Junior5). I also remember that some games and white began 1.h3 and did a draw were posted here by Jorge pichard. I do not think that the sitation is different against humans. Uri
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.