Author: Ricardo Gibert
Date: 13:41:05 07/01/03
Go up one level in this thread
On July 01, 2003 at 16:25:12, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >On July 01, 2003 at 16:04:45, Ricardo Gibert wrote: > >>On July 01, 2003 at 15:31:55, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >> >>>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 >> >>It doesn't seem as well suited, because it is not specialized for playing only >>chess. How would feel about Deep Blue driving you to work through rush hour >>traffic? > >My mistake. Humans are less complicated and better at chess than computers. > >-Tom Your sarcasm not withstanding, it's possible that the part of human brain required to play chess is the size of a walnut. Certainly, animals with a brain smaller than that size are computationally much more sophisticated than Deep blue. What the pentagon wouldn't pay for a smart weapon with intelligence and perceptual abilities of an eagle.
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.