Chess Championship: Humans vs. Computer

An anonymous reader writes "X-bit labs has posted very interesting editorial called "Chess Championship: Humans vs. Computer". During the last 10 years computers penetrated into various spheres of human life. In this article guys try to find out how well computers can play chess and if it would be correct to say that artificial intelligence is superior to human mind. Interesting read."

Comments

Re:computer can't handle non-computable problems

[cyco_penguin]

Godel's theorem says nothing about the ability to understand Godel's theorem. It simply states that in any formal system (FS) sufficiently powerful to support Peano Arithmetic, there are theorems about FS which can be expressed in FS, but cannot be shown to be true or false (are undecidable) within the rules of FS. I.e. unanswerable questions may be asked of any sufficiently interesting system.

Quite what bearing this has on the ability to "understand" such a system is beyond me. Prove God exists. Prove God does not exist. Can't do either? Oh well, you're obviously not intelligent then.

Re:The problem with your argument.

[kisrael]

Well, swap "electrochemical" for "chemical" and I think it may well cover the neural paths you're talking about. And yeah, those neural paths have to be established, but there's nothing mystical about it, it's just very diffucult to understand.

Re:The flaw of being perfect

[TerryAtWork]

I believe that there is a parameter called the 'contempt factor' that takes this into account.

It is used to increase the computer's score and decrease the opponent's to make the computer take aggressive chances with a novice that it wouldn't with a pro.