Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 09:58:26 05/02/99
Go up one level in this thread
On May 02, 1999 at 12:19:18, Dave Gomboc wrote:
>On May 01, 1999 at 16:49:51, Peter Fendrich wrote:
>
>>On May 01, 1999 at 14:00:40, Christophe Theron wrote:
>>
>>- snip -
>>
>>>So what you call knowledge is "knowledge in the evaluation only"?
>>>
>>>Why do you want to narrow the field of knowledge?
>>>
>>>Through the years I have learned that chess knowledge is not only about
>>>evaluating positions, but also about deciding which lines to search. Ask any
>>>grandmaster: this is a fundamental issue in chess.
>
>This was not my suggestion. I do not see it anywhere in the thread either.
So what do you mean?
>>>If you want to know if program A has better knowledge than prog B, just let them
>>>play a long match. The one that wins is the one that has the most knowledge
>>>about chess (I mean the most relevant knowledge, I suppose you are not
>>>interested in irrelevant knowledge).
>>>
>>>It is as simple as that. Any other dichotomy about what is knowledge and what is
>>>not is artificial.
>
>This isn't true. There is a difference between means and ends. There is also a
>difference between ability and understanding.
>
>>>
>>> Christophe
>>
>>Agree!
>>There are (at least) two ways to use the term Knowledge-based:
>> 1) Strictly as in the AI field. I know of no program worth mentioning
>> that uses knowledge engineering, knowledge bases or something like
>> that. I don't even think it would be a good idea...
>
>Well, as a graduate student in the AI field, I hope that Christophe and you will
>permit me my insistance that _this_ is the way that attaches real semantic
>meaning to the term, and other uses debase the term's value.
OK, so can you describe knowledge (or better knowledge) without using a
reference to the fact that better knowledge gives better performance? What other
concept can you use to decide that some "knowledge" is better than another?
We are not talking about any kind of knowledge, are we? We are talking about
what's efficient, what describes the best the world we are living in, what you
have to know to win the game.
>> 2) In a more general way, meaning that the program is build up by more or less
>> *pure* chess knowledge.
>> There are no *pure* chess knowledge in the program. Everything in the
>> program has to be tuned, including the chess knowledge. It is not possible
>> to include some evaluation term without thinking about how it cooperates
>> with the search. For the same reason it is not possible to make good
>> changes in the search heuristics without thinking about how it affects
>> the evaluation code. The different parts of the program has to work together
>> as a whole. The best program as a whole has the best chess knowledge.
>> Of course we have something called luck but that's another story... :)
>
>The best program as a whole might not have the best chess knowkedge, it might
>simply execute compute things more quicky. The computer is not self-aware that
>it is computing something more quickly than it would had it chosen an
>alternative way, so I reject that e.g. code optimization implies more knowledge,
>even though performance may be improved.
I don't agree. The fact that "thinking" faster (or looking at more variations in
the same time) gives better play IS chess knowledge. Yes man.
There are games (tic-tac-toe for example) where you can find the absolute best
move after a practical limited amount of time. In chess the amount of time to
compute the absolute best move is so long that it is practically infinite. So
thinking longer gives better play (unless you have a pathological search). This
is chess knowledge. This is trivial chess knowledge, but any player knows that,
and it is part of any chess program.
If you want to deny this idea you have to find a definition of knowledge that
don't rely on the concept of performance.
Failing to do so you'll have to include many things into the concept of
"knowledge", and some of them will not fit common sense. And suddenly the term
"knowledge based" will look terribly useless.
Christophe
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.