Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: I would prefer that Rolf not be allowed into this group.

Author: Roger D Davis

Date: 13:07:58 05/20/02

Go up one level in this thread


Rolf is the reason that this forum was created. Let's please remove him as soon
as possible.

Roger



>Excuse me if I ask a question already answered a hundred times or more in this
>forum. Could someone explain, perhaps in understandable numbers of percentages,
>how important the strength of the engine is in chess programs, are there
>differences between commercial and amateur programs?
>
>Let me demonstrate a little thought experiment. If I would gauge (in 2002) the
>actually most known chess programs against say 1000 human chess players (first
>step) to get some insight into the Elo numbers, I would expect that the top
>programs would at best get Elo performances of 2200 - 2350, if I let the engines
>play without books and implemented book-like tricks. Now, if I'd do some comp vs
>comp over a period of a decade or such, I'd expect the leading engines to reach
>astonishing Elo of 2600, maybe 2700! So, what we had found were two things:
>without books engines would be outplayed by better human chessplayers but
>through imbreeding processes the Elo of the engines could still reach Super-GM
>Elos. Now, at that moment I'd organize show matches between the engines and
>former or actual champions, with a guaranteed sum of say 1 million of USD for
>the champion no matter if he'd looses or wins. What would be the next step?
>World champion the engine XY on 1 million GHz?
>
>A fair copy of this:
>
>Enough interest=money provided naked engines of chess programs would be
>dispersed by human players from the quality above expert status. Humans will
>learn to pay attention to the difficulty of tactical play resulting from the
>overall depth of 6 to 10 moves at maximum. The rest of the time will be used to
>discover typical exploitations of horizon. Humans will adapt to a completely
>different chess. New patterns/ algorithms will be developped for early
>spottings. Depending of the specific engine 'early' could well be a whole book
>with chapters about "Winning from move 1 on against FRITZ 25" or "How to survive
>in a fortress against JUNIOR 12b" etc.
>
>Still, we had the programs with books.
>
>Now, for these programs we need only players from a level of Elo 2500 upwards.
>Eidetical talents are absolutely required! Then we can repeat the whole
>procedures from above.
>
>Still, we had the Elo numbers due to our imbreeding technology.
>
>In pure comp vs comp matches we could still fabricate magic Elos (We let older
>programs play on older hardware vs new programs on new and stronger hardware!).
>Then we make some show events with tricky programs, with newest books doctored
>until the morning of the first game. The results affirmate by far our Elo
>numbers by imbreeding.
>
>
>But back to the question, what is the real strength of the chess engine? How
>would you measure it? When will the engine itself begin to reflect its 'chess'?
>How many years from now it will take to develop a real chessplaying robot who
>could participate in human tournaments completely on his own? Buying new books
>he reads, asking collegues for some information about this or that,
>differentiating between truth, lies and irony.   ;-)
>
>Rolf Tueschen



This page took 0.01 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.