Author: Tom Kerrigan
Date: 12:31:55 07/01/03
Go up one level in this thread
On July 01, 2003 at 14:29:25, Ricardo Gibert wrote: >On July 01, 2003 at 14:21:12, Tom Kerrigan wrote: > >>On July 01, 2003 at 13:32:19, Ralph Stoesser wrote: >> >>>Hello *, >>> >>>Why no top engine uses neural networks for positional evaluation in non-tactical >>>situations? Are there interesting publications about neural networks and chess >>>programming? >>> >>>Ralph >> >>Neural networks are for analyzing things that are >>"fuzzy"--voice/image/handwriting recognition, etc. Chess is a very exacting >>game. (It makes a big difference if your rook is on d1 vs. e1.) I doubt neural >>networks will ever be useful for chess. >> >>-Tom > > >Hmmm..but Kasparov uses the neural network within his brain to play chess >doesn't he? Are you contending he does not use his brain to play chess? Divine >inspiration? > >Perhaps you meant to say something like, "I doubt [the current interpretations >of] neural networks will ever be useful for chess." Kasparov has billions of neurons with 10-50 times as many interconnections. A PC has 50 million transistors and plays chess approximately as well. It's obvious to me that the human brain is not as well suited to playing chess as a computer (esp. considering that most human brains are much worse at chess than a 386). -Tom
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.