Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 07:39:53 02/28/99
Go up one level in this thread
On February 27, 1999 at 16:19:46, Leon Stancliff wrote: > While scrounging around in the research area of ICC, I found what I think is >very interesting data. I have been interested for many years in the human vs >computer chess ratings. It is but a matter of time before any person who desires >will be able to own a computer chess program that plays at lower grandmaster >level, even at time limits of 40/2. > > Why does this seem to be such a hot topic? Automobiles make faster time than >the top human runners. Machines are also superior to humans in other areas. The >reason this is so intriguing is that we are here considering human thought >processes, and also that the competition is very close. > > Here is the data I found. I first looked at the Fide ratings of the >grandmasters on ICC who were in the 2500 to 2600 range. There were about fifty >of these persons. I compared their ICC Blitz ratings with their Fide ratings. >The average Fide rating was 2532. The average ICC Blitz rating of these persons >was 2686, or 154 points higher than the Fide rating. > > The average Blitz rating of the seven highest computer programs was 2929. Thus >the computer programs were clearly superior to the grandmasters in the 2500-2600 >range at Blitz times. > > Next comes the shocker! Although very few grandmasters are willing to play at >ICC standard times, there were ten who had played enough games to be >significant. These ten grandmasters had ICC standard ratings of 2456. The same >ten had Fide ratings of 2541. Note that the standard ICC rating is 85 points >lower than the Fide rating. Obviously these standard games were played at much >shorter time limits than 40/2. Still, these figures would cause us to be >suspicious that top computers which are rated above 2500 are more than capable >of competing on even terms with grandmasters rated under 2600 Fide. > > Come on grandmasters. Let us see some more standard games at 30 0 against the >top computer programs! Losses do not take away from your prestige. Are you game? You've already highlighted the problem here. 30 0 games are already known to be problematic for humans vs computers. IE we had a tournament on chess.net a year or so ago with 4 computers and 4 GM players, at game/30, and _all_ four computers finished above all four GM players. So I doubt there is any argument about a computer being a GM+ at blitz or even at game/30. But 40/2 is a good bit different, and you won't find any of those on the chess servers...
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.