Author: Matthew Hull
Date: 12:42:14 01/31/03
Go up one level in this thread
[snip] > >A couple of things here. 1. I _am_ rethinking my "position". But I am >beginning >to lean toward a _totally_ different conclusion than you might expect. Namely >that >"super-gm players" are _not_ really super-gm, they are simply able to >bluff/out-think >the lower-rated players. But when it comes to a computer, it can play multiple >moves >that are very ugly looking, but the human can't deliver the fatal blow, unless >he does >it _quickly_. The longer the game lasts, the greater the probability of an >error by >the human, and the game goes south. > >It is clear that for a general "chess skill" the computers are _nowhere_ near >the top >GM players. At least in terms of analyzing a position to produce the best move. > But >fatigue is a bigger issue that I would have guessed, as can be seen from the >Kramnik >match and now the Kasparov match. The human seems unable to keep up the mental >sharpness needed for 3-4 hours at a time, and one daydream later the game is >over, >as we have seen. In game 1, Kasparov blew it out quickly before tiring. In >game 2, >he was in a worse position but found a deep tactical plan and out-thought the >machine >to a draw when he might have lost. In game 3, he created a good position that >the machine >had no idea about what was happening, but when there was no quick kill, "meat >makes >mistakes" returned to haunt him and turn a simple draw into a complicated loss >that he >didn't even want to fight to a conclusion... > >So I am perhaps redefining my definition of "GM strength" to have a "weariness" >component. Since a computer has no such problem, the longer the game, and the >more >complex it is, even if the machine is losing, it will probably draw or win due >to the >"weariness factor". > >Something I had not considered before. > >We knew it was a factor for long matches... ie karpov vs kasparov for the WC >years ago. >But now it is becoming a problem in a _single_ game... that is interesting. > > > > > [snip] > >I think "the longer the run" the worse the human is going to do. Based on the >"weariness factor" that has become more apparent. > > > >The programs will continue to get better. To the point that a GM can't even >match wits >with them on a single position to find the best move. But it seems that sitting >down and >playing for four hours, against a strong program, is getting to be more than the >human >mind can handle... It would seem that the fatigue advantage of programs should be worth an ELO estimate on top of the programs estimated playing strength, at least in a standard human match setting. Perhaps in a more relaxed setting, at a time of the human's own choosing, the GMs perform better against programs. I am curious if there are GMs on ICC that are able to consistently draw/win against Crafty at slow time controls. I know that I don't like to play serious games of chess on FICS unless I'm feeling particularly alert, (usually after eating a half bag of carrots). Matt
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.