Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 23:37:06 07/12/02
Go up one level in this thread
On July 13, 2002 at 02:23:00, eric guttenberg wrote:
>Are you saying that a program that falls for a trojan horse sacrifice
>(as most programs apparently do, at least at shorter time controls)
>will eventually "figure it out" and stop accepting the sacrifice??
>
>I am aware that most programs have "book" learning but I do not know that
>they can learn from positions. If so, would not Nemeth be discovering
>this from the programs he is beating?
>
>Someone please correct me if I am wrong, but I thought chess programs
>do not have positional learning.
Many chess programs (including amateur programs) have positional learning.
Examples include Crafty, Sjeng and KnightCap.
Now, I should temper what I said. You might discover a principle that defeats a
chess engine. Then you can possibly fool it again with transpositions or
perhaps with applying the same principle but something changed a little bit.
You might also find a bug in a program and exploit it over and over.
Some programs do not learn (I think most {if not all} professional programs do
learn). If they do not learn, they certainly ought to.
It might also take quite a while for enough statistics to accumulate to know
that a particular move is bad.
Suppose (for instance) that a chess knows position Q wins 300, loses 200 and
draws 100. You may have to beat it 100 times before the position looks even if
the program only has book learning. So for a long time you can beat the
program. But at some point enough statistics accumulate and the attack stops
working.
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.