Author: martin fierz
Date: 17:18:16 08/19/02
Go up one level in this thread
On August 19, 2002 at 15:08:00, Dann Corbit wrote: >On August 19, 2002 at 12:58:08, Jeff White wrote: > >>In a 24 game match with the time control of 2 1/2 hours for 40 moves, who wins? >>The best human player or the best computer player? In my opinion this would be >>the only true way to solve this. How come it's never been done like this before? > >Why do you imagine that 24 games will create an answer to the question? > >It will only raise more questions. > >There have been many man/machine matches. None of 24 games that I know of, but >there is nothing magical about the number 24. there sure is nothing magical to "24", but i think it's clear that longer matches are more desirable from a statistical point of view. i guess they should favor the human, who can try to adapt to his opponent - something the computer can't do very well (change openings is probably all you can do as a computer). the short matches we have seen so far (van wely - rebel, 4 games; deep blue - kasparov, 6 games; fritz - huebner, 6 games etc.) tend to mask the fact that the machines can't learn, since the humans don't get a second chance to do it right. aloha martin
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.