Insights Blog
-- Browse All Articles --
Physics Articles
Physics Tutorials
Physics Guides
Physics FAQ
Math Articles
Math Tutorials
Math Guides
Math FAQ
Education Articles
Education Guides
Bio/Chem Articles
Technology Guides
Computer Science Tutorials
Forums
Chemistry
Biology and Medical
Earth Sciences
Computer Science
Computing and Technology
DIY Projects
Trending
Featured Threads
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Chemistry
Biology and Medical
Earth Sciences
Computer Science
Computing and Technology
DIY Projects
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
Other Sciences
Computing and Technology
Is chess fundamentally harder to "effectively" solve than Go?
Reply to thread
Message
[QUOTE="PAllen, post: 6852256, member: 275028"] And me, yours. The character of "sharp" or "drawish" cannot be derived from the rules of the game. It is characteristic, instead of the algorithms of the imperfect player. There is no such thing as most chances for winning without a model of the error profile of the imperfect player - which is not derivable from the rules. Agreed, and my claim is that though never ever losing, error free play based on a tablebase would draw even more often against todays top engines than they do against themselves. As a result, it would lose in round robin tournament play (but never in match play) against a selection of today's top engines. My observation is that it is interesting that perfect play (per tablebase) could be less effective in a tournament than imperfect play that includes accumulated knowledge of opponent error profiles (and I claim that all win probabilities and numerical positions evaluations used by top engines are effectively ways of modeling this opponent error profile). Optimal play against any opponent could be achieved by knowledge of every position the particular opponent evaluates incorrectly (as to drawn/won for white/lost for white), along with a tablebase providing truth. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Post reply
Forums
Other Sciences
Computing and Technology
Is chess fundamentally harder to "effectively" solve than Go?
Back
Top