Author: Mark Young
Date: 16:33:11 09/01/98
Go up one level in this thread
On September 01, 1998 at 17:53:36, Robert Henry Durrett wrote: >Although there apparently have not been many games played between the top >programs and humans strong enough to win against these programs, there seems to >be a general consensus among the more computer-savvy CCC members that at least >some of the better programs are [or "probably" are] better against humans than >their comp vs comp tests would seem to suggest. True? > >For those on this CCC who know at least a little about how chess engines work, >the questions: > >(1) "What do you suppose there is about the inner workings of such programs, >which do better than expected against humans, that help these programs against >humans?" > >(2) "What is there, specificaly, about some programs which make them seem to NOT >do better against humans than their comp vs comp test results indicate?" > >If specific answers can be obtained, then what do these answers suggest for >future design guidelines for chess engines? Maybe its as simple as not playing the best moves all the time, but keeping the computer program from making stupid moves (from a human point of veiw) the least number of times when playing humans. Just a guess.
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.