Computer Chess Club Archives




Subject: Re: Artificial Intelligence in Computer Chess

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.


This page took 0.08 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.