Author: Roy Eassa
Date: 14:16:33 04/17/02
Go up one level in this thread
On April 17, 2002 at 16:46:42, Roy Eassa wrote: >On April 17, 2002 at 16:24:22, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On April 17, 2002 at 15:59:18, Roy Eassa wrote: >> >>>On April 17, 2002 at 15:48:49, Roy Eassa wrote: >>> >>>> >>>>A given computer's rating will go down significantly (even though it does not >>>>gain or lose one iota of strength objectively) if and when its human opponents >>>>gain anti-computer skills. >>>> >>>>Does that make sense? >>>> >>>>I guess early ratings are one thing and ACTUAL STRENGTH is a different thing >>>>that is much harder to measure (requiring much more scientifically controlled >>>>circumstances). >>>> >>>>For humans versus humans, the two things (rating and actual strength) have >>>>tradionally been closely related, except when the player is a young child who is >>>>improving very rapidly. >>>> >>>>There is significant reason to believe that RATING and actual STRENGTH can get >>>>*way* out of sync with each other when it comes to computers, due to the extreme >>>>relevance of the anti-computer skills (and not normal chess skills) of the >>>>humans they have faced. >>> >>> >>> >>>Also, most (nearly all?) computers that have gotten an early rating (using fixed >>>hardware and software) have seen that rating drop SIGNIFICANTLY over time, as >>>humans learn better how to play well against computers. >>> >>>Does that mean: >>> >>>a) The computer is getting steadily weaker at chess? or >>> >>>b) Humans are quickly getting much better at chess? or >>> >>>c) A computer's early rating is NOT an accurate reflection of the computer's >>>actual chess strength, but is SKEWED by the fact that humans lack a special >>>skill that is required in order for them to score accurately against computers >>>-- a skill that is SEPARATE and distinct from the traditional skill most human >>>chess players have focused on? >>> >>>d) Some other explaination (please fill in)? >> >>A computer with constant hardware and software should not be allowed to get a >>rating against humans if it cannot change it's evaluation function and players >>can repeat similiar strategies to beat it. >> >>If the evaluation function is not changed after learning from games then it >>should not get a rating without changes in the software. >> >>Usually changing the evaluation is done by the programmers. >>I think that it can also be done by automatic learning of the program from >>games. >> >>I think that the program also need to be private in order to get a rating >>because in other cases the player may buy the machine and repeat a game that the >>machine even did not know about. >> >>Uri > > >I was not actually referring to a *specific* human learning the weaknesses of a >*specific* program, but rather to the likelihood that most GMs will improve >their overall anti-computer abilities with time, and some will improve this >ability by a LOT. > >Take a strong program running on a fast PC -- I'll agree it could rate 2700 in >current GM matches -- and put the only copy of it in a vault for 6 years. Let >no human play it or study it during that time. Let the best 3 anti-computer GMs >of the year 2008 play matches against it. > >I think there's a very significant probability that that SAME program running on >that SAME hardware would then achieve a rating of 2500. Did it get 200 points >weaker sitting in the vault? Imho, PART OF the reason computers have scored so well against GMs in the past 2 years is that GMs have not yet learned a necessary survival skill -- one that is SEPARATE from traditional chess skill -- that is required ALONG WITH their chess skill in order to play computers adequately. The reason GMs have not learned this skill is simply that it has not been required until very recently, whereas standard chess skills have been required for centuries in order to defeat humans. Interestingly, GMs have also developed a different survival skill -- psychological in nature -- that IS required to do well against other human GMs but is NOT required to do well against computers.
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.