|
|
|
Author
| Message |
|---|
|
|
| I'm sure that a correct implementation of alpha-beta with an evaluation function that considered only material and checkmate would have a four-figure rating on this site, if not 1500+. |
Yes, if you are into doing things in a brute force fashion. There are plenty of phD papers on algorithms/optimisations for chess.
My interest is more in AI. Having a computer that comes up and tests its own rules of thumb and self modifies them as it plays more.
I have made a brute force engine before that can beat me at 5 min chess, but then I am very poor on the clock. Brute force engines focus around pruning algorithms to avoid branch explosion and optimisations of parameters around board evaluation (for calculation I'm talking about. Obviously there are also shortcuts for the opening (Opening Books) and simplified endings (End game table bases))
I also intended for my rules of thumb AI to be able to say why it had made a particular move, and what it expected as the response etc.
|
|
|
DuskXIV wrote:
richerby wrote:
| How on earth do you parse 'you cannot use a computer' to mean anything other than that computers are prohibited? It says nothing about 'external advice'. It says, plainly and simply, that you cannot use a computer. |
I explained this |
No, I'm sorry. You have not explained how 'you cannot use a computer' means 'it's OK to use computers'. It really is a very simple sentence and I'm quite amazed that you're spending so much time trying to show that black is white.
| if you try and make a move without a computer, you're still running some program or other inside your head. You don't agree? |
I don't see the relevance. I am not a computer. I am not using a computer program. I am not using an algorithm because my thought processes are not governed by a specific set of instructions. And even if I was using an algorithm, the speed and accuracy argument I made earlier is a massive quantitative difference between implementing that algorithm in my head and implementing it on a computer.
| you could not do in a week what your computer could do in seconds. |
I've done this for debugging. It takes a few minutes. |
OK but I think this says your program is on the wrong track. If you believe that this program can become a strong player, what you're saying is that anyone who's allowed to take notes and maybe use a calculator could be a strong player, by forgetting about chess and just following your algorithm. Doesn't that sound unlikely?
Dave.
|
|
|
We don't know enough about the human brain to say that. ;)
| [...]Doesn't that sound unlikely? |
Nope. That's what every computer does, as far as I know. And I do have faith in my computer. I was proud to see that it thought the optimal opening for both sides was the Four Knights/Double Ruy. (I don't like it personally, but its reputable and a plausible candidate.) And that's with no opening book, no search function and bugger all of an evaluation function. Best of all, it could tell you __why__ it likes the position. That's beside the point though. Would a player doing such not, for all intents and purposes, be using a computer?
Extensionally, at least, he would.
Regarding the "you cannot use a computer" point...
I'm trying to argue something further along the lines of "grey is lead-coloured". Don't take things so literally, or you incur further danger of being considered a computer. :P The rule refers to the fact that in correspondence play - well, anywhere - its considered cheating to get assistance from a computer in your games.
(P.S. I don't wish to be mean and I'm sorry if at some point I appeared as such. I'm glad to hear your opinion on this.)
|
|
|
Using the Opening Browser on this site is using a "computer or computer program to evaluate or analyze a game".
Yes, it is rudimentary but the 'chess program' in this case is your browser and it follows a JavaScript program to repeatedly accept input of your opponents moves and suggest strong counters.
A player using this computer program will artificially inflate his or her rating ... possibly significantly if they are weak in openings.
|
|
|
Well if we are being degenerate you can't use the think button either...
or the whole site...
but I really don't think that is what the rule is saying.
|
| Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 9 Next |
|
|
|
