Computer Chess Club Archives




Subject: Re: chess and neural networks

Author: Ingo Lindam

Date: 09:44:56 07/02/03

Go up one level in this thread

>  b) they do not work very well for situations they are not trained for
>     and in chess you always explore new positions which are not trained yet,
>     which is an easy thing to understand once you understand that chess has
>     10^44 positions and you could train perhaps for 10^2 positions at
>     most very well so missing around 10^40 somewhere.

I am not voting for using NNs for chess, but is b) a fair agrument?
Isn't it sufficient to see all significant features of positions often enough.
Also a GM doesn't see 10^44 positions before he starts to play as a GM.
Ofcourse the GM does obtain and evaluate some very concrete lines. And I don't
suggest neither a human being nor a computer to play chess without calculating
concrete lines. (As well as I would not suggest to play chess without having
plans and aims and some kind of chess knowledge)

Internette Gruesse,

This page took 0.01 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 07 Jul 11 08:48:38 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.