Author: José Carlos
Date: 16:43:56 08/07/02
Go up one level in this thread
On August 07, 2002 at 19:21:46, Russell Reagan wrote: >On August 07, 2002 at 04:04:20, José Carlos wrote: > >> Don't forget it. In my personal experience as a programmer, it's been useful >>for me to simplify logical statements or try to prove when two complicated >>logical statements are equivalent. > >I know simple logic. It's the more advanced stuff that drove me nuts. The and's, >or's, conditionals, and so on I had no problems with. But when we got into the >"for all x such that there exists some y such that y is a member of the set >of..." I lost interest in a hurry. To me that would only be useful if I was >attempting to do a proof for a PhD or something, which I have no plan of doing. >My view of that more advanced logic is that it's a very complicated way to say >something simple :) > >I think there are some very good examples of what I'm talking about in academic >papers written about chess programs. You will see them say something like, "For >the player to move, p, where p is a subset of the set of all players >participating in the game, and where p is not equal to any other subset of the >set of all players P, for all actions a that are a subset of the set of all >actions A, such that a is not equal to any other subset of A...(and so on)". >That was the long way to say, "the player to move chooses a legal move." This is >the kind of stuff that drove me nuts. I know how it feels :) I think I read some years ago about a chess program written in prolog, which is a logic-based languaje. I don't remember where I read it, but I'll try to search for it. I was suprised that something like a chess program could be written in prolog. José C.
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.