Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 21:06:08 11/01/02
Go up one level in this thread
On November 01, 2002 at 22:52:14, Bob Durrett wrote: >On October 31, 2002 at 20:01:10, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On October 31, 2002 at 17:00:19, Bob Durrett wrote: >> >>> >>>Solving the general problem of emulating the chess play of "humanity" might be a >>>prohibitively difficult task. >>> >> >>This has been the "holy grail" of AI since its early days. But the problem is, >>in 25 words or less "we have no idea how a person does what he does when playing >>chess (or anything else for that matter), which makes it _impossible_ to emulate >>what we don't understand." > >Well, Bob H., emulating the chess play of a human is not exactly what the AI >people want to do, is it. They wish to make a carbon copy of a human in all >it's gory details. > >Many orders of magnitude different, I would say. > >Bob D. They really want to emulate human thought processes related to chess, at least for the computer chess/AI purists. But until we know how the human does what he does, emulation is futile, to paraphrase the borg. :) > >> >> >> >> >> >>>Perhaps a lesser accomplishment would be "good enough." For example, one could >>>select a dozen or more specific humans and then emulate them individually. If >>>the group of humans selected for emulation were chosen wisely, maybe they would >>>represent [or "cover"] the entire population reasonably well. The larger the >>>group, the better they could represent the entire population of human >>>chessplayers. >>> >>>Suppose someone with a 2800 rating were selected and called opponent #1. >>>Then someone with a 2700 rating might be selected and called opponent #2. >>>This could be continued until the rating was so low that there would be no need >>>for more. >>> >>>#1 = 2800, #2 = 2700, #3 = 2600, #4 = 2500, etc. >>> >>>The next step might be to expand the list by having several individuals at each >>>level but with different playing styles. >>> >>>There should be quite a few distinct emulated humans at the amateur levels, >>>since that's where most of the people using the program would be. >>> >>>The intent maybe should be to emulate these people primarily in the middlegame >>>and maybe endgame. The opening repertoires of the individuals might also be >>>copied but that might not be such a good idea unless the repertoires were large. >>> A typical amateur might not have a complete opening repertoire at all. In this >>>case, one might be provided for him. >>> >>>To select a specific individual to be emulated, it would be necessary to have a >>>fairly large collection of his/her games played at the desired performance >>>level. Such a collection might be hard to find for amateurs. >>> >>>How could the chess play of a specific individual be emulated without such a >>>collection of games? Maybe general well-known traits of chessplayers at the >>>level being considered could be used to synthesize an emulation in that case. >>> >>>The emulations could then be used in a chess-playing program designed to serve >>>as a training tool. People would train against the emulated individuals at >>>their level in preparation for future contests with humans. >>> >>>Clearly, this would be inferior to a full-scale emulation of all of the >>>chessplayers in the World. For example, if the number of individuals emulated >>>were too small, one might "learn" the individual traits of the specific >>>individual emulated. After that, playing against that specific emulated >>>individual might become boring. >>> >>>Care would be required to assure that the games would have some variability. >>>This could be done in the opening, especially. Maybe a random number generator >>>would be used to randomly select the openings. This is surely done by most or >>>all programs using an opening book anyway. >>> >>>Bob D.
This page took 0.01 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.