POLL: What is more important?

General discussion about computer chess...

What is more important?

Determining and defining which engines are clones, derivatives, or completely original
10
22%
Working towards creating stronger engines
36
78%
 
Total votes: 46

User avatar
xshat
Posts: 98
Joined: Sat Jun 19, 2010 10:44 am

POLL: What is more important?

Post by xshat » Wed Aug 11, 2010 12:32 am

Chess is chess, and when the day comes that chess is solved, all chess engines will be clones of each other. So what does it matter if people take certain ideas from other engines or not; as long as it makes chess stronger then it's one step closer towards solving chess.

There hasn't yet been one author smart enough to create a completely unique engine that can never lose, so shouldn't all the best programmers just work together to achieve this end? Or is it more fun to watch the drama unfold and people bicker over who stole who's ideas and source code, and have chess development remain stagnant due to opposition. Chess is a competitive game, but does solving chess also have to be so competitive?

User avatar
Uly
Posts: 838
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 5:33 am

Re: POLL: What is more important?

Post by Uly » Wed Aug 11, 2010 6:53 am

xshat wrote:Chess is chess, and when the day comes that chess is solved, all chess engines will be clones of each other.
Not true, solving chess still leaves the problem of finding the best moves against an opponent that doesn't have access to the solution.

For instance, chess is a draw, so imagine that in the opening position 1.e4, 1.d4, 1.c4, 1.Nf3 and 1.Nc3 are optimal, which one do you play? Against an opponent without the solution the first four choices are better than the fifth, otherwise I can draw the solution by playing (as black):

1. Nc3 Nc6 2. Nf3 Nb8 3. Ng1 Nc6 4. Nf3 Nb8 5. Ng1 Nc6 {Draw by threefold repetition}

Because since a perfect game is a draw, playing that isn't different, right? Wrong! The task of the engine is now to lead the game into complex positions and hope that I blunder and go into a lost game. This isn't an easy job as the engine knows that all the drawing moves are always at my disposal, so it'd require opponent modeling (what works against one player doesn't against another).

Having chess solved would only give the engines a lot of more wide space for style, since a great percentage of the moves will draw, the engines will differ in what move they will play, and I won't be surprised if the engine's styles are more different than they are now, since it's possible an engine could play 1.f3 and beat most opponents without the solution.

But solving the game is so out of the horizon that it seems irrelevant now, it'll probably require a new approach and breakthrough that in retrospective the last years of computer chess would have no effect on finding the solution.

What matters is the present, and in the present engines' origins are important.

User avatar
xshat
Posts: 98
Joined: Sat Jun 19, 2010 10:44 am

Re: POLL: What is more important?

Post by xshat » Wed Aug 11, 2010 7:52 am

Ovyron wrote:
xshat wrote:Chess is chess, and when the day comes that chess is solved, all chess engines will be clones of each other.
Not true, solving chess still leaves the problem of finding the best moves against an opponent that doesn't have access to the solution.

For instance, chess is a draw, so imagine that in the opening position 1.e4, 1.d4, 1.c4, 1.Nf3 and 1.Nc3 are optimal, which one do you play? Against an opponent without the solution the first four choices are better than the fifth, otherwise I can draw the solution by playing (as black):

...

But solving the game is so out of the horizon that it seems irrelevant now, it'll probably require a new approach and breakthrough that in retrospective the last years of computer chess would have no effect on finding the solution.

What matters is the present, and in the present engines' origins are important.
Solving chess would create a 32 man tablebases, in which every move would be known by the engine, hence they would all be clones since they would always make the perfect move. It may take a while but to say it is too far off may or may not be certain.

Do you provide any reason to say that engine origins are more important than engine development?

User avatar
Uly
Posts: 838
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 5:33 am

Re: POLL: What is more important?

Post by Uly » Wed Aug 11, 2010 9:01 am

xshat wrote:Solving chess would create a 32 man tablebases, in which every move would be known by the engine, hence they would all be clones since they would always make the perfect move.
You missed the point, at a given position there are several playable moves, there is no "THE" perfect moves, there are many that are perfect.

See for yourself, we already have 6men solved:

http://www.k4it.de/index.php?topic=egtb&lang=en

Go there and paste this FEN:

3rk3/3p4/8/8/8/8/3P4/3RK3 w - - 0 1