Comic Discussion > QUESTIONABLE CONTENT
WCDT: 2281-85 (24-28 September 2012) Weekly Comics Discussion Thread
Near Lurker:
--- Quote from: Carl-E on 02 Oct 2012, 07:35 ---I think that's the point. Certainly, people have a "style" of driving, and similarly, chess players have a style of play (or develop one, or are taught "a few tricks") that can help lead to a stronger position. A human has not the resources to analyse the game the way a computer can, even if that analysis is limited. Otherwise, it becomes like tic-tac-toe...
--- End quote ---
A computer doesn't have those resources, either. The way they learn is by playing mock games, against humans and themselves, to figure out what works and what doesn't. For this reason, the programs of two designers can have appreciably different "styles."
Carl-E:
OK, granted that the complexity of the game prevents a computer from seeing through to the end, but it can see a lot further down the tree of moves than a human can. In addition, it can run these mock scenarios much more quickly than a human. But it can only "learn" in a way that it's programmed to, and that accounts for the majority of difference in the "styles" of the programs.
A human can learn a new style when exposed to it, combine styles and come up with something new and surprising.
Unfortunately, that applies to driving, too...
Is it cold in here?:
Which is why a human can come back from a loss and beat the computer again, even though the computer hasn't gotten any dumber.
jmucchiello:
--- Quote from: Near Lurker on 03 Oct 2012, 12:05 ---A computer doesn't have those resources, either. The way they learn is by
--- End quote ---
... doing exactly as they were programmed to do, and only if such code is part of the program. Chess programs do not need to be written such that they learn anything. The entire thing can be just a board position search with a fixed evaluation algorithm.
Seriously, a half-way decent programmer can probably knock out the core of a Chess playing program and hand tune it to play well against "average to good" Chess players in about two to three weeks. Most of that time will be spent on pruning the decision tree and memory leaks and little of the time would involve "playing" Chess. Chess is not complex. It just has a large number of possible board positions. If I were board, I'd attempt this "challenge".
Pilchard123:
The search tree is probably the biggest problem for chess engines. The bigger it gets, the harder it is to keep memory use in check.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version