Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 07:23:01 06/24/04
Go up one level in this thread
On June 24, 2004 at 00:24:39, Keith Evans wrote: >On June 23, 2004 at 13:48:03, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >>On June 22, 2004 at 07:46:02, TEERAPONG TOVIRAT wrote: >> >>> >>>Hi, >>> >>>I've never seen any downloadable Chinese chess program that can match >>>a strong human player. IMHO, it's much more difficult to create a master >>>level program than in chess. In chess, when you lose the first pawn,it's >>>likely that you'll lose the game eventually. But, in Chinese chess, you may >>>find yourself in trouble after you have 1-2 pawns up in the opening. >>>And you have to handle many specific endgame positions differently. >> >>>Regards, >>>Teerapong >> >>There is no commercial motivation for writing chinese chess programs that's the >>sole reason why the more popular of the 2 games is dominant in computer games. >> >>I know the rules of both games and can assure you that it is for an outsider >>much harder to write a chessprogram beating the strongest chessprograms, than it >>is to write a chinese chess program beating the strongest chinese chess >>programs. >> >>Note that both require a big effort, but chinese chess is at a much lower level >>thanks to commercial driven developments in chess. It is not about the rules, it is about beating the competition. The competition is a lot stronger in chess because there was more to earn with this historically seen. All big important algorithms are developed for chess, not for chinese chess, though that is no proof for anything it definitely says something significiant. Offer a $10 million reward to beat worlds best xiangqi player and nothing if not. But even then i hope you realized they made hundreds of millions of dollars with computerchess past 20 years. XiangQi can never compete with that. >Don't you think that rules for xiangqi are more complicated that for chess? (See >Chapter 4 Section 4 of http://www.clubxiangqi.com/rules/asiarule.htm) I don't >think that there is any free Xiangqi program which understands these rules. If >you could distill these rules into some trivial C code, then you could help to >improve the computer referees at the online servers, and you could also help to >improve the state of non-commercial Xiangqi software. > >It is my belief that Xiangqi masters could exploit programs which don't >completely understand these rules, but I don't have any firm evidence of this. >It's difficult to find much written by masters which has been translated into >English. It's not clear to me that the rules are well defined in >computer-computer competitions, in fact there are some that believe that the >rules should be simplified for computers. I assume that masters insist on some >official rules when playing computers, but I don't know this for a fact. (Either >AXF or CXA rules?)
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.