Deep Blue Insane search!

[Andy]

hes the one we all hate

[Cervantes]

MysticVegeta wrote:

El commandmente: Are you the one who Cervantes hates?

Double-you tee eff?

Don't be putting words in peoples mouths, now. Hate is a strong word.

[[Gandalf]]

Actually, Elcomandate is right. There are a multitude of improved chess engines available nowadays, Fritz, Deep Fritz, Hiarcs, Hydra (although it's not available to the public), and some others which would easily beat Deep Blue on the same kind of hardware.

If I remember correctly, after Kasparov beat Deep Blue for the first time the IBM team came to him for help. They wanted to adapt the program for just his kind of playing style. In return he got to see the search logs and everything like that which Deep Blue could give. Could this have something to do with the unexpected move?

I doubt Deep Blue's ELO would be 3400, especially in competitions against other supercomputers.

*edit* Sigh... I really should stop waiting hours before posting...

[MihaiG]

yes....personaly Fritz 9 the newest one is the most powerfull single proccesor engine...until they come out Deep Frtiz 8 (multi-prossecor) is the strongest for multi-proccesor home based systems....

ive played amyng ames with F9 agsint DF8 and its even

[MysticVegeta]

But the intention of my post was the level it was at that far back at time...
but poeple sitll aurge taht hmuans are bteter tahn cmoupters [/dan]

[codemage]

Only the highest chess-playing percentile of humans.
All but the weakest chess software can beat the masses.

[[Gandalf]]

There are also some people who train specifically to beat computers. One guy was rated 1800 real life, and he beat computers rated around 2500+.

I didn't know Fritz 9 was out, but I do have Deep Fritz 8. As I recall, last time I went to the computer vs computer section, there was something (possibly Hiarcs?) which was usually beating other people's Deep Fritz's.

[MysticVegeta]

I only have chessmaster 9000, its rated at around 2900. It was interesting to make computer vs computer, the games were draw.

[Hikaru79]

MysticVegeta wrote:

Hikaru79 wrote:

MysticVegeta wrote:

Hikaru, you have the documentary in what? Video or book?

It's a video. If there's a book out there, I'd be interested to hear about it.

dam I would like to watch it, where did you buy it?
ahem, cough, Can you copy and send it to me. LOL. [/idiotic question]

Come to the IRC channel. A few people have already had their wish granted, if you know what I mean. *nudge nudge wink wink*

[[Gandalf]]

MysticVegeta, the ratings that Chessmaster gives itself are probably inflated. Also, I'm fairly certain that it uses a different rating system (ie. not ELO).

Chessmaster is a good program though, since it offers a lot of flexibility on playing strength. I made a "personality" on CM10000 that is stronger than "Chessmaster" in short games, and a bit weaker on longer games.

[cool dude]

i was thinking of programming chess on turing or VB in the summer. i just don't know where to start on my algorithms. does anyone have any hints.

P.S. i got Kasparov's chess computer. it cost a shit load! i learn quite a lot of new openings and its awsome. unfortunately, so far i only manages to beat level 1 intermediate. Advanced is crazy. it says that it looks 8 moves ahead which is pretty good, considering average players like most of us think only 4 to 5 moves ahead.

[blaster009]

I've got that chess computer too ...I got it for my birthday waaay long ago. It's freaking awesome.

WARNING: CHESS PROGRAMMING SPOILERS
*The following description is very specific...If you wish to figure it out for yourself, I suggest you skip ahead*

---BEGIN SPOILERS---
Anyhow, if you're gonna be making a chess game, start simple with the board, evidently. An 8 * 8 multidimensional array of strings should be great. Then, store "pwnblk" or "qwnwht" in each of the squares, and use "null" as an empty square. If you keep the names of your pieces to 6 characters, you can easily use the last three to identify piece ownership, and thus control where units can/can't move (only to a square with "null" or the opposite colour's piece). GUI-wise, draw a grid of tiles (50x50 or w/e) and then divide the user's click position on the screen by the tile size to find out which tile the user's clicking on...For piece movement, it's a simple matter of making the sure the user is moving their own piece, and the tile they're moving it to mathematically matches the movement patterns of the units (slope comes in really handy here...m = [y2-y1]/[x2-x1]). As far as AI goes, that's a little bit trickier. My personal strategy would have the computer examine possibilities, assign points to each one, and then choose the play with the highest point value. To avoid taking forever, it would force a move if the computer takes over 10-20 seconds.
---END SPOILERS---

Anyhow, that's my take on chess. As you can see, I haven't given programming a chess game any thought at all. Lol. Oh, and I think there should be a spoiler HTML tag that hides certain portions until you click on it. You could use it for forum quizzes and such.

[MysticVegeta]

blaster009 wrote:

As far as AI goes, that's a little bit trickier. My personal strategy would have the computer examine possibilities, assign points to each one, and then choose the play with the highest point value. To avoid taking forever, it would force a move if the computer takes over 10-20 seconds.

I am in process of making one and I gotta tell ya, its a lot more than that; When you are saying assign points to each one, you are talking about algos people already made, they make life really easier, so what I would suggest, is first brainstorm what you are gonna implement in the AI then go to google and search up AI algorithms that could be used for chess.
Offtopic: No periods ^

[blaster009]

Lol...I said I was making AI. I didn't say I was making SMART AI.

[MysticVegeta]

lol. Why not make it smart?