Author: Eelco de Groot
Date: 19:50:13 12/12/99
Go up one level in this thread
On December 12, 1999 at 00:54:56, Tina Long wrote: >On December 11, 1999 at 22:55:33, Eelco de Groot wrote: > >> >>On December 11, 1999 at 12:53:27, Jason Williamson wrote: >> >>>Just a point, we already have a lot of programs being rated in a elo like >>>fashion, vs both computers AND humans. Of course I mean the ICC. It is >>>interseting to note that computers that exclusivly play humans are about 200 >>>points higher rated on avg then the same engine on simular hardware playing both >>>computers and humans. >>> >>>Jaosn Williamson >>> >> >>Well yes, this might be so but isn't that practically all based on fast >>time-controls? Computers/programs excel there against humans so it is no wonder >>that they have high ratings.. >> >> Eelco >> >And also, on the Internet you never know exactly who you are playing against. > >There has been much reporting of players claiming to be humans but actually >being computers. From this threads point of view, more important is when the >player claims to be a computer but is human-assisted. (cite: Kasparov's claims >that Benjamin may have been telling Deep Blue what to do) > >If I was Tigger playing a 40/120 game on the internet, I could overrule the >computer in making a move, or (more likely) I could test my own thoughts with >the computer while I was awaiting my opponents move. > >If a program is to get a result against a human there needs to be checking of >legitimacy, preferably by getting the combattants sitting opposite at a >chessboard. Yes, Tina. But I can't believe there are programmers who would ever want to do such a thing. The results of the game would become useless, from a programming point of view. It would be no fun at all to win that way, but if the boss is Big Blue maybe that would not be important. It would be impossible to reproduce the "computer's" play. There are always memorydumps, logs etc. to back up what the computer has played, provided there was no human intervention of course. Not many programmers nowadays I think dare to "correct" their program's play anymore. I believe Christian Donninger says about Nimzo's unfathomable play in such cases: "It's beyond the tenth ply". Sometimes even the programmers have trouble trying to find out why their program is doing what it is doing. As a programmer, dare I speak for them, I think you naturally have to have faith in what your program is doing. (It's the same with children I suppose. If you constantly keep worrying about them and how they will fare you don't have much of a life.. Following with half an eye now a program on the BBC about all the problems of parenthood. Even without sound, the radio is on too, it looks difficult enough..) If you don't think your program will improve with time and effort anymore I suppose then it is time to go do something else. It can be a frustrating thing too, to change something in your program and find that it now does what you want but also it suddenly now does wrong what it did right before. Frans Morsch when asked about his new creations like the Super Mondial, used to say such things in Computerschaak years ago. It teaches modesty I suppose, that job, and you end up being very happy with a few ratingpoints increase on the SSDF list every other year to show for all your programming efforts, trying to teach your program something new. Luckily human learning, learning in animals too is different. We can integrate much better things we learn without upsetting the things we already knew. I am only something of a 1200 player so I don't think I would get away with it if I used a computer and not tell about it.. Maybe I'm not very competitive in such things.. Never played correspondence so maybe I could do a little better there, with the help of Rebel and its friends if allowed. Think you could beat me? I know you have other things on your mind and other things to do in the summertime now.. Well anyway year-books are standing by here for reference too if needed any time. I hope you found some of your links back! Did you lose many? Best wishes, Eelco
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.