Author: Jeroen van Dorp
Date: 13:59:20 02/15/00
Go up one level in this thread
...against computer chess progams, that is, art form or exact science :(( I am not familiar with the contents and works of tablebases, but as I think they simply have all possible moves in it, so the computer can choose the best answer at any move you make with known result. Maybe one day there will be 32 man tb's, but it needs some processor strengt. Maybe Buck Rogers or Captain Picard can enlighten you on that. If that is the case, the computer doesn't make an assessment anymore, and you can't talk about computers solving the problem. It's just reading from their database. A big one for sure. It should be that a computer or computer program has the abillity of real advanced fuzzy logic or so (just a comparison, no exact match intended) if it can assess a position in the "right" way. We certainly need other programs than that. If just brute processor force lets programs solve a 20 or 30 move solution,it maybe that a computer can beat any human alive today, but still hasn't got the understanding. My opinion is that a computer should have real understanding, and that's Artificial Intelligence (non human intelligence:)) in stead of calculation force. Who's going to build the perfect artificial chess brain? As long as we don't understand our own brains, it will take a while. But certainly it will happen. As anything will happen the moment you say it can't be done. Well, it's slightly different answer from the question you pose, but I think you get the message: if we don't know all the basics, we can't formulate the absolute endings. I'm not sure if I want you to be right or wrong. I simply cannot grasp the consequences. But it stays a nice subject. Jeroen ;-} http://zip.to/jeroen
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.