Author: Terry McCracken
Date: 11:22:51 05/20/02
Go up one level in this thread
On May 20, 2002 at 10:15:44, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >Excuse me if I ask a question already answered a hundred times or more in this >forum. Could someone explain, perhaps in understandable numbers of percentages, >how important the strength of the engine is in chess programs, are there >differences between commercial and amateur programs? > >Let me demonstrate a little thought experiment. If I would gauge (in 2002) the >actually most known chess programs against say 1000 human chess players (first >step) to get some insight into the Elo numbers, I would expect that the top >programs would at best get Elo performances of 2200 - 2350, if I let the engines >play without books and implemented book-like tricks. Now, if I'd do some comp vs >comp over a period of a decade or such, I'd expect the leading engines to reach >astonishing Elo of 2600, maybe 2700! So, what we had found were two things: >without books engines would be outplayed by better human chessplayers but >through imbreeding processes the Elo of the engines could still reach Super-GM >Elos. Now, at that moment I'd organize show matches between the engines and >former or actual champions, with a guaranteed sum of say 1 million of USD for >the champion no matter if he'd looses or wins. What would be the next step? >World champion the engine XY on 1 million GHz? > >A fair copy of this: > >Enough interest=money provided naked engines of chess programs would be >dispersed by human players from the quality above expert status. Humans will >learn to pay attention to the difficulty of tactical play resulting from the >overall depth of 6 to 10 moves at maximum. The rest of the time will be used to >discover typical exploitations of horizon. Humans will adapt to a completely >different chess. New patterns/ algorithms will be developped for early >spottings. Depending of the specific engine 'early' could well be a whole book >with chapters about "Winning from move 1 on against FRITZ 25" or "How to survive >in a fortress against JUNIOR 12b" etc. > >Still, we had the programs with books. > >Now, for these programs we need only players from a level of Elo 2500 upwards. >Eidetical talents are absolutely required! Then we can repeat the whole >procedures from above. > >Still, we had the Elo numbers due to our imbreeding technology. > >In pure comp vs comp matches we could still fabricate magic Elos (We let older >programs play on older hardware vs new programs on new and stronger hardware!). >Then we make some show events with tricky programs, with newest books doctored >until the morning of the first game. The results affirmate by far our Elo >numbers by imbreeding. > > >But back to the question, what is the real strength of the chess engine? How >would you measure it? When will the engine itself begin to reflect its 'chess'? >How many years from now it will take to develop a real chessplaying robot who >could participate in human tournaments completely on his own? Buying new books >he reads, asking collegues for some information about this or that, >differentiating between truth, lies and irony. ;-) > >Rolf Tueschen Nice Troll! You really need to stay on your regime of medications.
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.