Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site eosp1.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!princeton!eosp1!robison From: robison@eosp1.UUCP (Tobias D. Robison) Newsgroups: net.chess Subject: Re: Can computers ever play world-caliber chess? Message-ID: <1165@eosp1.UUCP> Date: Tue, 9-Oct-84 12:50:43 EDT Article-I.D.: eosp1.1165 Posted: Tue Oct 9 12:50:43 1984 Date-Received: Wed, 10-Oct-84 04:27:11 EDT References: <12734@sri-arpa.UUCP> Reply-To: robison@eosp1.UUCP (Tobias D. Robison) Organization: Exxon Office Systems, Princeton Lines: 27 It's not reasonable to assume any linear increase in playing strength for ech doubling in machine speed. As the search goes through more and more plies, a doubling in speed has less and less effect, because the number of positions to search increases exponentially (roughly) with the number of plies. Above a rating of 2200, doublings in speed might be worth 50, 25, 15, 8, 6... respectively. Adding depth to the middlegame search may allow a computer to become world champion if computers simply start to outstrip the accuracy of any human searches. This doesn't seem likely to happen for a while. When it does begin to happen, humans will use the best computers as "trainers", and boost their own performance to match the computers for a while; humans have shown over and over an ability to boost human performance if there is any way to push them. As computers become able to press human beings in the middlegame, endgames will become more important. Does anyone want to comment on Karpov's judgment in arranging to win collect his 4th win by exchanging his bishop for knight, and then temporarily sac'ing a pawn, to wina knight-vs-bishop ending? Some computers may be able to play endings like that moderately well, but when will they be able to decide to steer into them? - Toby Robison (not Robinson!) allegra!eosp1!robison or: decvax!ittvax!eosp1!robison or (emergency): princeton!eosp1!robison