Author: Bob Durrett
Date: 19:00:35 11/04/02
Go up one level in this thread
On November 04, 2002 at 21:33:52, Dann Corbit wrote: >On November 04, 2002 at 20:22:44, Bob Durrett wrote: > >> >> >>I guess people think trying to program self-awareness into their chess engines >>is getting dangerously close to trying to create life. That is clearly taboo >>for chess programmers. > >Not necessarily taboo. Just beyond what is possible right now. In 20 years or >so, we will be able to create computers smarter than we are. > >>So how about just adding code to do "self-monitoring" and "self-adjustment" >>during and between games? That wouldn't be taboo, would it? It could almost be >>called "learning." You don't have to be alive to learn, do you? > >Lots of computer programs learn. >There is TD-Lambda learning >There is book learning >There is position learning > >Probably some other kinds too. > >The real problem is the compute power. The reason we don't have computer >programs that learn in the way that humans do is that we don't have the >horsepower to do it. Hence, some other method than a neural net with feedback >is needed. Dann: Do you, then, see "doing self-monitoring and self-adjustment during and between games" as being identically the same thing as "learning"? Could no "self-monitoring" and/or "self-adjustment" be done which is not already covered by the cases you cited above? 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.