Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 08:42:38 05/21/02
Go up one level in this thread
On May 21, 2002 at 09:15:08, Torstein Hall wrote: >On May 20, 2002 at 16:54:06, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On May 20, 2002 at 16:48:49, Albert Silver wrote: >> >>>>>Let me clarify the argument against that statement: "there is no currently >>>>>existing in FIDE or USCF rules that prevent memorization of long seqauences >>>>>of opening moves." Never has been, never will be. >>>> >>>>I think it is easy to make an argument that permanent memory is written >>>>material. If you store a openingbook on your harddrive it is written material in >>>>my view. Its there to read for anyone with a PC to connetc to the HD. :-) And as >>>>such against the rules! >>> >>>I think it is equally easy to argue that hashtables are nothing more than >>>written notes that the program writes and then consults. Afterall, the fact that >>>it is stored/written into memory should make no difference, otherwise I could >>>simply load the opening book into the RAM. I know that I am not allowed to write >>>down my own analysis during a game to consult while I am playing. I think it is >>>therefore also time to ban hashtables. Adios Fritz! >>> >>> Albert >>> >> >> >>That is where the argument takes us. My evaluation "patterns" are clearly >>written on the disk and read in at execution time. And then they are clearly >>written into memory. The _entire_ program is really illegal if anyone wants >>to take that particularly obtuse argument... > >Whatever way we look at this it is reasonable arguments both ways. Of course >programs in the form we have them today will have less and less to do in human >competition. > >But I think it would be interesting if someone could make a program that would >work on the openingface of the game, not just copy human moves. Perhaps the >programs could add something to our opening knowledge, not just copy human >analysis. I imagine a program that experiment with different opening lines it >calculated itself, learn, try new lines and do some real learning. Slowly >building its own openingbook. But this just dreaming I guess. > >Torstein > > I believe you will find this has already happened. Many humans try to play computers by playing oddball first moves to "take the machine out of book." As a general rule that doesn't help them at all because _they_ are out of book as well. Kasparov tried this against deep blue. It failed. You will also find several novelties found by computers. My first program found one 30+ years ago that was published in Chess Life. It happens all the time. > > >>>> >>>>So what it boils down to is what kind of material you consider the openingbook >>>>on your PC to be. >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>>So the argument is totally moot. As shown by the USCF allowing computers to >>>>>play in rated events for 40 years. FIDE even allowed them for a period of >>>>>time... >>>> >>>>In the "old days" the programs where so weak that we allowed them to "cheat" >>>>with a openingbook. Without it the programs would play to stupid chess. Now I >>>>think it is time for the programs to do without. >>>> >>>>Torstein
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.