Author: Mike Byrne
Date: 18:36:10 10/09/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 09, 2002 at 16:26:26, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On October 09, 2002 at 14:52:43, Terry McCracken wrote: > >>On October 09, 2002 at 12:50:22, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On October 09, 2002 at 12:46:42, Otello Gnaramori wrote: >>> >>>>...the question is if Fritz team is allowed to make the same changing of the >>>>params of the program to tune it better against the Human Champion strategy, or >>>>at least to make Fritz to not repeat the same moves each time... >>>> >>>>w.b.r. >>>>Otello >>> >>> >>>I think the pre-match agreement prevents this, which is a pretty stupid >>>stipulation IMHO. >>>The human can study a game and change his strategy for the next, but the >>>computer cannot? >>> >>>The agreement is really a joke, IMHO. >> >>Do you think it would really make that much difference, considering how Kramnik >>lures it out of book early and then proceeds with his strategy to exchange >>Queens, to exploit endgame weaknesses all programmes suffer from? >> >>If you change parameters for the programme to hold it's Queen, for example, >>it may be a serious mistake, allowing Kramnik a strong or even winning >>advantage. >> >>I think we can't compare changing parameters with Fritz, a commercial programme, >>on an 8 CPU machine to that of Deep Blue a supercomputer, which has tremendous >>flexibility. I just don't believe there is room for serious improvement in this >>case. >> >>IOW it may make little difference or worse, causing Fritz to go down in flames! >>IMO Fritz is playing well and fighting well, considering it is drawn into the >>area of the game all programmes struggle with. >> >>Terry > > >That I can't answer. But the rule saying it can't be done is just bad, period. >IE I have >some global sort of evaluation terms that I could (and would) modify between >rounds. If >I noticed the human trying to lock up the pawns, I'd turn that scoring term up a >bit to try to >avoid it. If he tries to attack then I'd turn that up to push him another >way... > >Fritz is playing fine, for a computer. Unfortunately, it _needs_ to be playing >like a GM, >which it is not doing at the moment... > >Kramnik's match agreement highlights this problem with all the practice he has >had against >an opponent that he _knows_ can't change ideas between rounds... I have to agree with you - it's a bad rule. I am a 1600-1700 player -- I can now regularly (after 2 years) beat Chess Genius Palm (often peg @ 2000) ona regular basis - it doesn't change - I know it's weaknesses. I am not a 2000 player now , I'm just a 1600/1700 player that can beat Chess Genius Palm. Under these conditions - access to the program for a long before the match and with no changes once the game started - the program would have to be several hundred point strongers than the GM to have a chance. But I don't think the Fritz people really cared - it's really not about winning for them - like it was for IBM. This is about computer chess promotion - and at that, they succeeded 100%. There is a lot more interest right now about computer chess than there's been for some time, since the DB-GK match. IBM's plan all along (I believe) was to beat GK and then to take the box apart. It's like hitting a home run in your last at bat. There will never be the same excitement regarding human/computer chess as there was in 96/97. Look at computer checkers - although never having the interest of computer chess - the high point was when Chinook won it's first WC against a human. It's been a PR non-event after the first couple of wins aginst top humans.
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.