Author: Peter Berger
Date: 03:36:04 11/02/02
Go up one level in this thread
On November 02, 2002 at 00:40:45, Uri Blass wrote: >On November 02, 2002 at 00:06:08, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>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. >> >>:) > >We do not need to know exactly what humans do to try to emulate them. > >If the target is to predict human moves then programs can calculate statistics >about the success of different algorithms in predicting human moves and choose >the algorithm with the best results. > >Uri First you have to decide which kind of human player you want to emulate - a strong one or a weaker one ? Both is interesting - let's take a human IM or GM player first. You can take a collection of master games and tune your program to emulate to predict the maximum percentage of human moves, or you can compair different programs and have a look which program comes closest. Will this program play most human-like? I don't think so. The problem is not the average move ( computers and human masters are already difficult to identify when you only look at the majority of moves), but the one, two or three "special" moves in a game. The moves where everyone would be sure it is a computer playing - take Fritz's Bf8 in game 2 against Kramnik for example. As long as you get one or two moves a games like this one you won't "deceive" anyone. In fact this is also a way to detect cheaters on chessservers. There could be another program that reproduces less human moves but also makes less "computer moves" - I am convinced it will look much more like a human and be a better emulation. Regards, Peter
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.