Author: Walter Faxon
Date: 16:37:45 04/06/05
Go up one level in this thread
On April 06, 2005 at 19:18:13, Ricardo Gibert wrote: >On April 06, 2005 at 18:29:07, Steven Edwards wrote: > >>From: http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/whatisai/node1.html >> >><Quote> >>Q. What about chess? >> >>A. Alexander Kronrod, a Russian AI researcher, said ``Chess is the Drosophila >>of AI.'' He was making an analogy with geneticists' use of that fruit fly to >>study inheritance. Playing chess requires certain intellectual mechanisms and >>not others. Chess programs now play at grandmaster level, but they do it with >>limited intellectual mechanisms compared to those used by a human chess player, >> substituting large amounts of computation for understanding. Once we >>understand these mechanisms better, we can build human-level chess programs >>that do far less computation than do present programs. >> >>Unfortunately, the competitive and commercial aspects of making computers play >>chess have taken precedence over using chess as a scientific domain. It is as >>if the geneticists after 1910 had organized fruit fly races and concentrated >>their efforts on breeding fruit flies that could win these races. >> >></Quote> > >Computer chess takes a lot of time and effort and in the absence of funding for >such research, going commercial is to be expected. Brute force was the preferred direction long before microcomputers made computer chess a paying proposition for anybody.
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.