Slashdot Mirror
Computer Chess Programs Vie "Live" For World Championship
Alex Laburu writes "The 17th World Computer Chess Championship is taking place in Pamplona through the 18th of May. As of this writing, Rybka (winner of the last two editions) is ahead of the pack and playing Shredder to consolidate its lead over Junior. You can watch the games live or otherwise follow the tournament asynchronously on the standings page, where you'll also find information about the hardware used by various teams."
Better than lawnbowls AND curling, chess played by computers is the most popular spectator sport...
Laughter is the best medicine, except if you have a broken rib.
This is the nerdiest sport ever. :D
First, we played games.
Then, we watched other people play games, and we played computer games.
Next, we watched other people play computer games.
And now, eliminating all human-to-human interaction, we watch computers play games.
Who called us antisocial? ;-) Oh well, king's gambit ftw, rock out with your pawn out, good luck... "ladies and gentlemen"? Or is it "Nuts and Bolts"? "Plugs and Jacks"?
As a chess researcher (in human cognition), I once had dinner with Doug Hofstadter and he mentioned his ideas concerning how a chess program should play, like humans do. It has been my goal for over 5 years now, and it's really hard. I could show Doug's idea that "analogy lies at the core of perception (of any scenario, including chess) by making psychological experiments in all levels, from novices to grandmasters. That work came out in journals like Cognitive Science, Minds & Machines, and New Ideas in Psychology (accepted). So I think we're on the right track. But my paper on the computational model has been rejected three times, the last of which, fortunately, has good reports from referees who only want the piece to be rewritten.
I long for the day in which Hofstadter's ideas would become more mainstream in AI and cognitive science.
Too bad Fischer isn't around. I found him much more interesting to watch than Kasparov. He would smash opponents, including computers (albiet, they weren't nearly up to the level they are now) into submission. Great stuff.
"I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." --Mark Twain
Human play is elegant, but loses to brute force
Brute force is not elegant
"Elegant force" where human characteristics combine with the power of machine computation is the end goal
BUT, winning chess against an equally-skilled opponent is a matter of finding forcing moves. When all forcing moves are known, chess is just a matter of brute force computation and massive memory
They restricted the hardware to 8 cores. As a result, the best programs, like those who run over clusters, are not playing.
Supposedly, this was to make money not a factor. In reality, some very nice expensive dual Nehalems are in action.
Interesting. Well, then computer chess geeks should refocus on cracking a game of Go. That should keep them busy for a while. :P
"I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." --Mark Twain
Interesting. Well, then computer chess geeks should refocus on cracking a game of Go. That should keep them busy for a while. :P
No doubt. There isn't a go program running on anything that I can't give a 9 stone handicap to and crush almost without thinking - and I'm only 2k. The day a computer beats a pro seems to be far in the distant future.
Only his tendency toward a dazed stupor prevented him from screaming aloud.
Perhaps one day there will be a finite number of 'perfect' games which cannot be improved upon, and a computer that is set up to play perfectly is compelled to play one of them.
However, chess is nowhere near played out. The computers in this tournament are still making mistakes that cannot yet be identified as such.
There are two different chess engines in each match-up, so there's enough pseudo-randomness, as you call it, in the differences between the engines, to ensure that these games will be relatively unique.
Richard