Author: Bob Durrett
Date: 08:38:57 12/19/02
The big challenge to all "serious" chess programmers seems to be to thoroughly trounce the top grandmasters. That seems like a worthy goal, doesn't it? Barring some unforseen "miracle breakthrough" in chess engine design, will we have to wait for the computers to get fast enough? Waiting for the silicon monsters to solve our problems for us is the "chicken" way out. Rolf seems to suggest that the problem is that the top GMs can think better than the chess engines. Assuming he's right, what can be done to make him wrong again? Maybe the unsolved problems associated with planning, "positional positions," and intelligent maneuvering in quiet positions are worthy problems? Maybe they, or similar problems, should be the focus of future efforts at innovation? On the other hand, there is still the irritating fact that pruning schemes are still not nearly as good as one might wish. If there are any REAL innovators out there, maybe they can make some sort of "pruning breakthrough." Hopefully, that would solve all of the problems of the chess programming world. 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.