Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old April 20th 04, 01:20 AM
Bob Jenkins
 
Posts: n/a
Default avoiding human strengths?

I hear that good human chess players have hundreds or thousands of
situations that they have studied. When they see a board close to
them, they coax the game into the situation they understand then rely
on their understanding of that situation. And computers can't play
that way because it's too expensive for them to classify the
situations. If that's all correct, then it would be to a computer's
benefit to avoid those situations when it's playing humans.

Perhaps it's easier to coax a game away from those situations than to
coax a game into them. Perhaps so much so that a human has to
recognize them three moves away while the computer only has to
recognize them one, or such. Situations should be easier to classify
when you're closer to them.

Is this feasible? Do chess programs do this?
  #2   Report Post  
Old April 20th 04, 03:21 AM
Noah Roberts
 
Posts: n/a
Default avoiding human strengths?

Bob Jenkins wrote:
I hear that good human chess players have hundreds or thousands of
situations that they have studied. When they see a board close to
them, they coax the game into the situation they understand then rely
on their understanding of that situation.


To understand this better you should do a search for the term "chunking"
in the citeseer database. You would also want to read articles by de
Groot as well as Simon and G something. Much analysis has gone into
what makes a grandmaster.

--
"I'm a war president. I make decisions here in the Oval Office
in foreign policy matters with war on my mind." - Bush

  #3   Report Post  
Old April 20th 04, 05:43 PM
Amos Soma
 
Posts: n/a
Default avoiding human strengths?

"If that's all correct, then it would be to a computer's benefit to avoid
those situations when it's playing humans."

How could a computer possibly know what board situations you personally are
familiar with and have studied in order to attempt to steer the game away
from that situation? Besides, why should a computer care what board
positions you are familiar with? Most chess programs today are playing near
2800 level chess. Unless the board position(s) most humans are familiar with
involve being at least a rook up, the human is usually going to get
destroyed.


"Bob Jenkins" wrote in message
m...
I hear that good human chess players have hundreds or thousands of
situations that they have studied. When they see a board close to
them, they coax the game into the situation they understand then rely
on their understanding of that situation. And computers can't play
that way because it's too expensive for them to classify the
situations. If that's all correct, then it would be to a computer's
benefit to avoid those situations when it's playing humans.

Perhaps it's easier to coax a game away from those situations than to
coax a game into them. Perhaps so much so that a human has to
recognize them three moves away while the computer only has to
recognize them one, or such. Situations should be easier to classify
when you're closer to them.

Is this feasible? Do chess programs do this?



Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Human analysis appreciated - I beat a much stronger opponent. Dr. David Kirkby rec.games.chess.analysis (Chess Analysis) 6 March 1st 04 02:13 PM
Layman's question about anti human modes enoch rec.games.chess.computer (Computer Chess) 14 November 21st 03 03:23 PM
Human insight Claus-Jürgen Heigl rec.games.chess.analysis (Chess Analysis) 3 August 11th 03 08:39 PM
Weak human player & computer skill BernardZ rec.games.chess.computer (Computer Chess) 0 July 26th 03 03:10 PM
Avoiding the sicilian Jarto rec.games.chess.analysis (Chess Analysis) 0 July 4th 03 12:45 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:19 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2019 ChessBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Chess"

 

Copyright © 2017