Author: Dave Gomboc
Date: 09:52:29 11/18/99
Go up one level in this thread
On November 18, 1999 at 10:57:45, Mark Rawlings wrote: >On November 18, 1999 at 02:26:28, Dave Gomboc wrote: > >>On November 17, 1999 at 14:33:55, Dann Corbit wrote: >> >>>On November 17, 1999 at 05:10:04, Pekka Karjalainen wrote: >>>>On November 16, 1999 at 23:55:19, Dann Corbit wrote: >>>>>Has the formal solution to checkers put an end to draughts? Just because a >>>>>machine can solve a problem does not mean that the problem is no longer >>>>>interesting. >>>> Is there a formal solution to checkers? I thought the game-tree was just >>>>too big for that. Can you supply a reference, please? >>> >>>http://www.cs.ualberta.ca/~jonathan/Papers/Papers/aimag96.ps >>> >>>They had a goal to complete the endgame database (10^20th positions) for the >>>computer to play perfect checkers. I thought that it has been accomplished, but >>>I was mistaken. They have completed the 8 piece tables and are working on the 9 >>>piece tables: >>>http://www.cs.ualberta.ca/~chinook/databases/databases.html >> >>He's not building the rest of the 9-piece tables, AFAIK. He is looking at >>solving the game, though. We (the GAMES group) think that the CS department's >>big iron is big enough to do it with. >> > >I would think the 9-piece tablebases (and probably the 10-piece...) would be >necessary to solve the game. > >Mark Yeah, but have you seen this thing _search_? Wooooo! ;-) Dave
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.