Slashdot Mirror
Detecting Chess Cheats Taxes Computers
First time accepted submitter jeffrlamb writes "Cheating in live chess matches — fueled by powerful computer programs that play better than people do, as well as sophisticated communication technologies — is becoming a big problem for world championship chess. Kenneth W. Regan is attempting to construct a mathematical proof to see if someone cheated; the trouble is that so many variables and outliers must be taken into account. Modeling and factoring human behavior in competition turns out to be very difficult."
I'd just use the CoD system for cheat detection. If they beat me, they cheated. Simple enough.
RTFA, you can use a computer to come up with a better move than you would have on your own.
...was hard to read.
None of us know everything. Therefore we're all naïve.
It's cheating in the same sense that using a dictionary in Scrabble is considered cheating if you agreed to no dictionaries before hand - not trying to use qzjkh as a word. In this case, rather than consulting a dictionary, they're consulting a computer to come up with a better solution than they could come up with on their own.
Then shortly after, the other player leaves.
I don't see how detecting chess can cheat the taxes computers. Our detecting chess should be none of the taxes computers business, IMO.
More of the usual bitching I've come to expect from taxes computers. Big complainers, them.
In that case, are the Olympics obsolete because the world's fastest sprinter can't even beat a moped, much less a Ferrari? Are painters obsolete because of photoshop? When the competition is man vs man, the abilities of machines shouldn't make it obsolete.
I, for one, welcome having an Aided Olympics where sprinters are allowed to use motorcycles and lasers.
Are they aiming the computer to detect only if they had outside help from a computer, so that outside help from a human chess player would not be detected?
Learn to love Alaska
Then the referee, who takes the chess set with him.
It pays to be obvious, especially if you have a reputation for being subtle.
If that's the case, just have the computer play Computer vs Computer.
My guess is they don't want to give up because they enjoy playing chess against other people.
1 (short ton / firkin) = 89.1432354 slugs / keg
Naked chess!
I am Bennett Haselton! I am Bennett Haselton!
So check the players for technology, and block outside communications. No algorithm needed.
Which is why I love chess boxing.
5 minutes of chess, 5 minutes of boxing, keep recycling.
Yes IT's hard to move pieces while wearing boxing gloves.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Or the same...
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
Pshhh.... qzjkh is a perfectly cromulent word.
Soon Slashdot will have a computer that finds and posts Oblig XKCD comics.
in a way they have. the convenience they bring us has convinced most of us to give up lifestyles that might include triathlons.
insensitive clod overlords obligatory xkcd car analogy russian reversals whoosh pedant fanbois ftfy in 3...2...1..PROFIT
The classic remark by Dreyfus, "No computer can play a decent game of chess", has been inverted. Today's commercial chess programs, running on ordinary desktop machines, or even laptops, can beat any human. No grandmaster has won a tournament against a chess program since 2005. Pocket Fritz 4 on a phone now plays at the grandmaster level.
Hence the cheating. About once a year, a major chess player is caught cheating.
It turns out that, even at the grandmaster level, about 1 human move in 10 is clearly suboptimal. So, one computers got close to the grandmaster level, they could beat humans just by not making mistakes.
RTFS, they intend to "construct a mathematical proof" to show that a given move, or number of moves, indicates cheating.
This is impossible to prove because it's always possible that the human made those moves on his own. By the same logic that you can assume a human player can only go so deep in the search tree, you can't assume a human player to arrive at a move solely by use of an optimal or deterministic process. A meatbag can see any valid move and decide to play it for any reason. You can't mathematically prove cheating unless you see them cheating. For all you know the player is just lucky,.
Parse error: Detecting Chess Cheats Taxes Computers
Parse error: (Detecting) Chess Cheats Taxes Computers
Parse error: (Detecting Chess) Cheats Taxes Computers
Parse error: Detecting (Chess Cheats) Taxes Computers
Parse error: Detecting Chess (Cheats Taxes) Computers
Parse possible: (Detecting Chess Cheats) Taxes Computers
Parse possible: (Detecting Chess Cheats) Taxes Democrats
Parse SUCCESSFUL: (Detecting Chess Cheats) [consumes] Computer [resources]
Pocket Fritz 4 achieved a higher Elo rating than any human, and that was on a PocketPC in 2009. And mobile hardware has evolved at an amazing pace since then.