Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Kasparov Wins Game 3 Against X3D Fritz

Posted by timothy on from the humans-aren't-so-bad dept.

Vulcao writes "Garry Kasparov just brilliantly won game 3 in the Kasparov vs. X3D Fritz chess match, which pits man against machine. Kasparov created a positional advantage on the queen side with a very strong pawn structure to which Fritz didn't have an answer. The result is now 1.5 - 1.5, and the last game will be this Tuesday, Nov. 18."

4 of 434 comments (clear)

  1. I disagree... by zeux · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...with people saying that if the computer wins over the human it means that "That's it, here we are, computers are more intelligent than man".

    Computer chess games deal with statistics and historics of previous games to decide how they will move their next turn. Usually they analyze hundreds of thousand of differents moves, even dumb ones !

    When a human player take a look at the chess board, he rejects the vast majority of the possible moves and concentrate only on very few of them.

    I would call that efficiency and if computers where as efficient as human, they would win easily without requiring huge processing power.

    --
    Iraq: war to save the U
    1. Re:I disagree... by GauteL · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "...with people saying that if the computer wins over the human it means that "That's it, here we are, computers are more intelligent than man"."

      Well, that is just a stupid thing to say anyway. If a computer consistently beats humans in chess, the only thing that has proved is that it is better than humans in chess.

      Chess, is not as some people seem to believe, the absolute sign of intelligence.

    2. Re:I disagree... by hawkestein · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Chess, is not as some people seem to believe, the absolute sign of intelligence.

      Well, it used to be, back before people really thought about how to build a chess program. One of the problems with AI is that we don't really know what "intelligence" is. Every time we are able to write a computer program to solve a problem that we thought required intelligence, we conclude, "Oh, then that can't be what we meant by intelligence" rather than "The computer has now achieved intelligence."

      --
      -- Will quantum computers run imaginary-time operating systems?
  2. Re:The game of Go ? by Space+Coyote · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I always wonder how long it takes in any chess thread before someone who thinks they've discovered the lost city of gold pipes up about go. And the answers they get are always the same, it's a totally different problem. We haven't built a robot to play tennis either, tennis is simply a different problem with a much much larger data set, just like go. A chess game with a 19x19 board would send a computer into shock too.

    --
    ___
    Cogito cogito, ergo cogito sum.