Author: Matthew Hull
Date: 09:06:37 01/22/03
Go up one level in this thread
On January 22, 2003 at 11:58:05, Christopher A. Morgan wrote: > >Bob, > >It shows me the abality of GK to negoiate a rule very favorable to him. >It is not at all certain that GK could, over the board, be certain of a >draw in a known draw position as determined with tablebases with, at least all >5 piece endings, and most likely some six piece endings. Now, in those >positions the game will end in a draw, which, in my view, is correct. This >does not address the situation where DJ sees a tablebase draw in its search and, >if it's losing trys to steer the game to that position. > >I like the rule. I do not see any contest between machine and man where >the machine looks up its move in a table, and waits for the human to make >a mistake. It is possible the machine could see a tablebase draw which a human would not know how to "solve" and thus lose the drawn position. The human would deserve the loss. This is the point of the man/machine contest. If the possibility of a game like this is so remote, then why have the rule in the first place? It is a bad rule, IMO. Matt >That the machine has a huge opening book is somewhat similar, >but as GK has a tremendous knowledge of openings it seems fair that the >machine have a similar knowledge. > >We know nothing about the opening book for DJ. And, apparently, there are no >rules for the opening book. I would like to see a rule that limits DJ's >opening book to a set number of moves, like 10-15 moves. As far as we know >DJ's book may be all games played by all strong players who have ever played the >game through to the final move. Where is the contest if the machine >just looks up its move in a table? > > >On January 22, 2003 at 11:06:48, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On January 22, 2003 at 05:12:52, Francesco Di Tolla wrote: >> >>>An important rule went unnoticed here. >>> >>>The program can use the tablebase, but the game is declared draw when the >>>computer hits a tblbase draw! >>> >>>Not a trivial statement: imagine Kasparov gets into a position where he is in >>>disadvatage, he can try to enter in an endgame he knows to be drawn even not >>>knowing how to play it. >>> >>>A sort of compensation for the fact Deep Junior has the TB's. >>> >>>regards >>>Franz >> >> >>That is yet another example of the stupidest rule anyone could come up with.
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.