Author: Mike Stoker
Date: 04:40:02 11/06/98
Go up one level in this thread
On November 05, 1998 at 18:39:21, odell hall wrote: >Yes Mr. Schoeder this is pretty convincing evidence That computers are >Grandmaster Level or slightly below!! I don't think I have seen one performance >by rebel9 which was below grandmaster level. Yet people continually say they are >not grandmasters, which to me appears to be based on emotional considerations >rather than factual considerations. This posting by you is just one more proof >in a long line of other proofs I have seen. I challenge anyone to produce a >less than grandmaster result by rebel!! I think the point is that computers are at least as good as top GMs in tactical games, and well below in postiional games. This is why we see some fantastic, sparkling victories, following by a humiliating thrashing!! Being a grandmaster involves playing well right throughout the game - not just "getting by" until a sparkling tactical combination is seen 20 plys deep. I don't think that computers can really be considered to be better than humans until they can gain at least a par with humans in their positional knowledge and awareness. This is difficult, because no matter how much knowledge you encapsulate within a program, humans are always able to apply logic to a situation, to create knowledge on the fly. Mike.
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.