mclure%sri-prism@sri-unix.UUCP (08/24/84)
[...]
The Machine Moves
-----------------
Depth Move Time for search Nodes Machine's Estimate
8 ply cxd4 18 hours, 7 minutes 6.5x10^7 +=
The Game So Far
---------------
1. e4 c5 6. Re1 a6
2. Nf3 d6 7. Bf1 e5
3. Bb5+ Nc6 8. d4 cxd4
4. o-o Bd7 9. cxd4
5. c3 Nf6
Commentary
----------
[...]
Tli@Usc-Eclb, USCF ?
Unfortunately, the voting will also keep out the inspired moves. So
we get an average game of all playing....
SLOAN@WASHINGTON
8. ... b5
It is worth noting a classical problem here in building a chess program:
1) The machine was following its book until this move,
2) As White, the machine should enjoy AT LEAST EQUALITY in the first
position following "book" recommendations,
3) However, having switched from "book" evaluation to its own
opening/middle game evaluation, the machine now decides that it
doesn't much like this position after all!
There are several possibilities:
0) Black is superior in the starting position (unlikely!)
1) the book (at least this line) is inferior, and the machine should
discard it (anyone out there think that the Prestige will do
this?)
2) the book is (objectively) correct, but this line does not match
the playing "style" of the machine (i.e., the position is OK, but
the machine doesn't know the correct thematic continuations, and
hence will indeed find the position to be difficult.)
This last possibility is most likely, and is not limited to machine
play. Many human players have the same problem when they memorize
columns and columns of analysis without understanding the REASONS for
the evaluations at the ends of the columns. This leads to post-mortem
conversations of the form "That master isn't so strong; I had him
CRUSHED in the opening...but he SOMEHOW escaped to a dead drawn
ending - he didn't even know that it was theoretically drawn - he
refused my draw offer! - I was so mad at him for that that I lost my
concentration for 1 move and hung a piece."
EWG@Cmu-Cs-Ps1, USCF ?
The comment that the group of humans won't have a
long term strategy is, I think, naieve. It is just
as easy for us to analyze lines of play (e.g.
kingside vs queenside attack, try to trade off and
queen a pawn, etc.) as it is for us to analyze the
single position. If anything it's somewhat easier,
since we think about that anyway. Why not solicit
votes on that level as well and at least report the
judgement (if not allowing it to directly choose the
move at hand, which would be rash). A suggestion
for later in the game, at least. This harkens back
to memories of 10 or so years ago when I was still
reading the chess books, and ran across a comment by
one of the grandmasters (Sam Reshevski, I think?)
who liked to play blitz and always used the style of
spending a significant time thinking about lines of
play at the start of the middle game.
His strategy was to have the lines firmly in
mind for later play. The comment was that his
opponents often got bored waiting for him to reply
at that time and wasted the real time; he could then
play at blitz pace much better as the game
progressed and the opponent struggled for the right
line(s) of play. It also had the surface appearance
of him putting himself deliberately
in time trouble, which wasn't the case.
Replies to Arpanet: mclure@sri-unix or Usenet: sri-unix!mclure.POURNE%MIT-MC@sri-unix.UUCP (08/26/84)
From: Jerry E. Pournelle <POURNE @ MIT-MC> query: is there a program that can convert from the algebraic notation to descriptive notation? I learned P-K4 and like that, and there is no possibility that I will ever have an intuitive feel for cxd4 and the like. Can it be converted for those of us who are algebraic cripples?
ab3@pucc-h (Rich Kulawiec) (08/31/84)
As it turns out, I suffer from the same problem (not comprehending
algebraic chess notation, as opposed to English notation), and I'm
working on a program to do conversions in both directions...and
I'll post to net.sources when it works...if it works.
--
---Rsk
UUCP: { decvax, icalqa, ihnp4, inuxc, sequent, uiucdcs } !pur-ee!rsk
{ decwrl, hplabs, icase, psuvax1, siemens, ucbvax } !purdue!rsk
It's better to burn out, than to fade away...