Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 06:46:12 05/13/02
Go up one level in this thread
On May 11, 2002 at 22:01:29, Christophe Theron wrote: >On May 11, 2002 at 19:16:33, Sean Mintz wrote: > >>I don't know if I completely agree with the statement, ''by trying to improve >>them it tends to weaken them in other ways'', but I do agree that we don't see >>enough radical ideas. It really seems hard to beileve that there are no other >>methods that we could be using, but just haven't found yet. > > >We have reached GM level and are slowly approaching the super GM level and you >want us to throw everything to the trash bin and start over with radically new >ideas? > >On the other end I agree that computer chess programs are still lacking in many >areas, we have ample room for improvement. the main lack is human awareness/intelligence which says: "he it is idiotic to follow this path because it makes no sense". Even a 1600 player, a level where any program is above, has an awareness of efficiency and stupidity which is far beyond computer chess levels. As a result of that several 1600 players i know reach won positions against programs (of course blowing it tactically soon then). Fact they reach such positions says enough how strong the computers are from calculation viewpoint and how weak in all the other terrains. >Maybe the radically new way will be to do the same things (alpha beta, and so >on), but in a much more aggressive way (human pruning is much more aggressive >than computer pruning). > > > > Christophe
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.