Author: Bob Durrett
Date: 19:45:21 11/02/02
Go up one level in this thread
On November 02, 2002 at 22:25:37, andrew tanner 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. >> > >Wouldn't it be possible to emulate human thought by having the program learn how >to play chess from scratch, just as people do? What would make it learn how to be human rather than something else entirely? Bob D. > >I just happened upon this neat little program written in 1993 that seems to do >just that. It's very weak, but it's a beginning. > > >http://satirist.org/learn-game/systems/sal.html > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>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 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.