Earlier quoted context omitted.
On beginner level this might work, but if people are more competitive they begin to realize the benefit of not only playing the own game, but reading the enemies plan (e.g. scouting in Starcraft/AoE2) to counteract it as much as possible. Chess against humen is different. Usually, there is no path to victory, only to remis. People just follow strategic plans that people told them would be slightly beneficial later on…
I agree with this. My default approach to board games is basically to maximize victory points early. This usually works; when 4 people are playing a new game for the first time, I usually win. This doesn't really work when people know how to play the game specifically, though. I think this algorithm is better than many other algorithms that people come up with, however. (As an aside, when I play a card game I sort my…
Grandmaster-Level Chess Without Search
131–133 of 133 posts
Re: Grandmaster-Level Chess Without Search
#132There is rampant misunderstanding of some parts of this article; allow me to help :) The "no-search" chess engine uses search (Stockfish) in in two ways: 1. To score positions in the training data. This is only training data, no search is performed when actually playing. 2. To play moves when the position has many options with a 99% win rate. This is to prevent pathological behavior in already won positions, and is n…
>> 1. To score positions in the training data. This is only training data, no search is performed when actually playing. That's like saying you can have eggs without chickens, because when you make an omelette you don't add chickens. It's completely meaningless and a big fat lie to boot. The truth is that the system created by DeepMind consists of two components: a search-based system used to annotate a dataset of mo…
Re: Grandmaster-Level Chess Without Search
#133Earlier quoted context omitted.
> So they freely admit that their thing will draw or even lose in these positions. Yeah, they didn't use Stockfish for the lols. They create a search-less engine for chess. And then used a search engine to pay a small minority of the game.
Yes. So how is this irrelevant for qualifying as GM-level play then? Being able to play these positions is a clear prerequisite for even being in the ballpark of GM strength. If you regularly choke in completely winning endgames, you'll never get there. This is cheating, plain and simple. It would never fly in human play or competitive computer play. And it's most definitely disingenuous research. They made an engine…
Except we're talking about moves where no human player would choke because they are basically impossible to lose except by playing at random (which is what the bot does).
It makes no sense to try and compare to a human player in the same situation because no human player could at the same time end up in such a position against a strong opponent and be unable to exploit them once there…
It's basically a bug, and what they did is just working around this particular bug in order to have a releasable paper.