Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: What Makes a Chess Engine Better Vs Humans?

Author: Ed Schröder

Date: 01:07:16 09/07/98

Go up one level in this thread


>Subject: Re: What Makes a Chess Engine Better Vs Humans?

>Hi Ed,

>I am in no way discouraging this kind of research.  As I have stated,
>I DO believe it's possible to emphasis a certain kind of intransitivity
>as you are trying to do with Rebel.  After all, chess players study
>their specific opponents in an attempt to increase their winning
>ability (even if temporarily) against that single opponent.  Since

>human and computers have known strengths and weaknesses it should be
>possible for each to take advantage of the other.

Yes.

>Having actual data as you suggest is certainly the way we should
>approach this if we really want to understand this phenomenon (or
>lack of.)   The very nature and difficulty of getting solid data
>on man vs machine makes this type of discussion more likely to
>involove lots of subjective opinion and speculation rather than
>facts and logical thinking.

Speaking for myself one could also re-define your "subjective opinion"
and "speculation" into "feeling". The "feeling" you have: "is this version
I am having now better than the previous one?".

You (we) do not have proof of that so our opinion is "subjective" and
full of "speculation" but that doesn't mean our "feelings" are not right.
And based on our "feelings" we eventually do produce better versions.

Observations are leading to new ideas and solutions that are full of
speculation and expectations. Later based on your experiences with
the new software this leads either to the rejection of the idea or to a
deep rooted conviction the idea is good.

In that stage you still have no proof. Still you claim: "this version is
better" based on your conviction. And isn't it true that in the end you
mostly are right? Unfortunately not always, but definitely mostly.

It's the same asking a GM: "why this knight on e5?". Answer: "Because
it belongs there". Subjective answer, full of speculation, no proof but
still the GM is right. Feelings...

Aren't the feelings we have on our software not the driving force behind
the improvements we all made through the years? Looking back myself
I think the answer is a clear yes. You can not proof chess, you must feel it :)

- Ed -


>- Don



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.