Author: stuart taylor
Date: 02:56:20 03/21/04
Go up one level in this thread
On March 21, 2004 at 01:49:48, Johan de Koning wrote: >On March 20, 2004 at 20:37:09, stuart taylor wrote: > >>And even if without further improvements in playing strength (but atleast the >>best setting should be the default settings etc. and it should stay ATLEAST as >>strong as it is now, and not do things which risk it getting weaker), can there >>be OTHER improvements of things which I have not yet seen, like a very advanced >>kind of chatter, which comments intelligently on the position, as well as a >>choice of different chatters e.g. 1).highly intelligent 2).humorous 3).humorous >>as well as completely clean! 4).Different combinations of the above. 5) >>encouraging etc. > >I think you'll find 1)...5) right here in this forum. :-) > >>Also, a finely tuned estimation of playing strength according to your games, but >>not based only on percentage of won, lost, drawn etc. > >That's tough. >As far as *playing* strength goes we don't have anything better than >Elo's statistical model. Insight, fighting spirit, distractions, and >not the least physical fitness, are all thrown at one heap. But then >again, that *is* what defines playing strength in the real world. > >... Johan In the real world, you KNOW very well in advance before you are going to play a rated game, and when you do, it's normally against other humans who have similar psychological make ups, and that is a part of the fairness (if not always 100% fair). A machine is ALWAYS playing for a rating, and under optimum conditions 24 hours a day and at its peak, champion attitude. If they made computer boxing programs, that would REALLY highlight the differences between human and machine! Well, It's a good job they don't! S.Taylor
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.