Author: Jay Scott
Date: 15:52:52 03/29/04
Go up one level in this thread
On March 28, 2004 at 16:18:41, Artem Pyatakov wrote: >in my opinion, the field of >computer chess has become obsessed with *tricks* (human-generated ideas that >happened to work without a good theoretical justification and cannot be easily >generalized to other games). Because these tricks work really really well, the >field has strayed from research into A.I. techniques. At the same time, any AI >work has to compare itself with chess engine filled with excellent >human-generated tricks, so it seems to perform poorly. I largely agree, though there's plenty of room for quibbling. Chess programmers, I've found, are remarkably resistant to changing how they do certain traditional things. For example, every time I propose calibrating evaluation not in millipawns but by some standard with a sounder theoretical motivation, I'm shouted down by everyone who does not ignore me. I don't understand that. By the way, have you read Blondie24 by David Fogel? It's somewhat related. Jay
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.