Author: Sune Fischer
Date: 06:30:59 11/03/02
Go up one level in this thread
On November 03, 2002 at 09:16:39, Omid David wrote: >On November 03, 2002 at 09:00:59, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On November 03, 2002 at 08:41:28, Omid David wrote: >> >>>On November 03, 2002 at 08:27:42, Joachim Rang wrote: >>> >>>>On November 03, 2002 at 07:37:26, Uri Blass wrote: >>>> >>>>>I believe that chess can be practically solved. >>>>> >>>>>I believe that you do not need to prove the result in order to get a draw in >>>>>every game. >>>>> >>>>>I do not expect it to happen in the near future but I believe that in 2050 every >>>>>comp-comp game between top programs in chess is going to be finished in a draw. >>>>> >>>>>Uri >>>> >>>>well that are concrete bets. Maybe you're right, but I hope not. >>> >>>Percentage of draws between top grandmaters has always been on an increasing >>>course. Nowadays 2 out of 3 games are ended in a draw. It is natural then, to >>>predict that in 50 or 100 years something like 4 out of 5 games will end in a >>>draw, and it could very well happen that in a little over a century almost all >>>the games between top grandmasters end in a draw. But that will not mean that >>>the game is solved, since the draw is the result of strength and knowledge of >>>the two players, not because they *know* what to play to reach a draw. >>> >>>You can call a game "solved", if everyone can learn what to do in a short time, >>>and will then, play the optimal moves forever (like tic-tac-toe). For computers, >>>"solved" will mean that they have a database or heuristic to determine the >>>optimal move at every position. For example, Shaeffer and his research group at >>>the University of Alberta are close to "solving" the game of checkers, in form >>>of having a database of win/lose/draw for every possible position. >>> >>>And according to this definition, the game of chess can NEVER EVER be solved. >> >>If programs always play the best move thanks to search and evaluation then >>The result is the same as the result that they do it thanks to database. >> > >Correct, but the problem is that a program can never play the best move without >such a database! Sure it can, it can find the solution at runtime by search. Why would it need to be stored in a file on disk for it to be solved? My pocket calculator does not have table of all multiplications and additions hardcoded in ROM, it simply has an algorithm to answer the question at runtime :) -S. >>I am also not sure that the game can never be solved by some database. >>There can be a rule for classes of positions and not for a single position so it >>is possible to have database that may give a move for every position and the >>size of the database may be smaller than the number of the possible positions. >> > >But still the database will be extremely large. Let's say you come up with a >database of _only_ 10^30 needed positions. Where will you store it?! > > >>Uri
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.