| |
Main
Date: 16 Jul 2007 16:56:00
From: Ray Johnstone
Subject: de Groot
|
I vaguely remember that de Groot in his book "Thought and Choice in
Chess" says there are about fifty thousand types of chess position.
But just where?
ray@iinet.com.au
www.iinet.com.au/~ray
|
|
| |
Date: 17 Jul 2007 13:41:36
From: Chess One
Subject: Re: de Groot
|
"Ray Johnstone" <ray@iinet.com.au > wrote in message
news:3ecm93159ah05fbq6j0viqjntrpm9dk1kr@4ax.com...
>I vaguely remember that de Groot in his book "Thought and Choice in
> Chess" says there are about fifty thousand types of chess position.
> But just where?
He said there were 75,000 //patterns// [nb. not positions] known to the
/master/ level player.
I'm not sure where on the web you can access de Groot [Adrian] - but in
terms of mainstream publications, see Gardner; Multiple Intelligence Theory
material - where chess is cited extensively as illustration of 'Abstract
Spatial Inntelligence'
I am working with a PhD student in chess, which is housed in a cognitive
psychology department in India. Recently we discussed what we knew of de
Groot from current observations, what we could validate, or could not, and
the results below are from /in vivo/ studies. Here is some of that
conversation:-
[[anyone interested in the very final note, of black/white perception, might
like to know that more recent in vivo testing of sighted and unsighted
players have led to an interesting breakthrough, and indeed a different form
of spatial perception in the 2 groups]]
Cordially, Phil Innes
00
> 7) The Paper: A Stable Room Mate Framework: *"there is no mechanism to
> predictably model such interactions unlike in chess, where thought
> processes
> are traceable to simple logical beliefs"* is a more challenging
> expression,
> and I am not sure I agree with it!
>
> I was talking from the model aspect (i know I contradicted to my own
> thoughts) comparing current education and chess from a Zero sum game
> aspect.
> I am not able to take education as zero sum as there are more disoriented
> people towards education which makes quality of the sample poor. For
> chess,
> throughts lies in what commitment you make at any instant based on simple
> beliefs.
>
> But this would engage a broader
> conversation, and I will just make some comments about other opinions
> below,
> then we can continue to talk and disagree if we wish!
>
> better clarity.>
>
> a*) the Dutch psychologist Adrian de Groot wrote that pattern perception
> occurs in chess /unconsciously/ and is the result of playing chess, and
> consequently that pattern perception in the same game is /not/ logical.
> That
> is to say, it is not a rationalisation, or even 'a thought process'. He
> does
> say that in order to be a good player, these pattern perceptions [right
> brain] need to be logically processed in linear fashion [left brain], and
> the two combine together to make good chess players.*
>
>>>>>I went throught his work, although not indepth - I fully agree with
>>>>>his
> perception theory. Since I have based my arguements with stimuli
> off-board
> too! - something like opponents and stable partner to stabilize the
> thought
> processes. I think I need to come back to you on this after some
> literature
> study.
>
> I have even told my students that if they are getting often to rest
> rooms during play - it reflects that their body is not participating in
> chess and the practices are not optimized towards the current piece play -
> which means although there are different stimuli - they need to be
> aligned
> for a Goal level alignment even inside the human body. I am working on few
> excercise tips for regulating human body for optimizing learning. That is
> what makes a person unified. So I dont agree on any linear processing that
> brain does to focus into game - Althought switching time for brain from
> one stimulus to another takes a linear time.
>
> b) *the implication in the above observation is that while the moves and
> basic tactics and rules can be taught, fluency of play does not come from
> teaching, but from the act of playing the game*
>
> I agree on this factor - thats why i focus on stable room mate to be a
> stimuli for building such fluency.
> c) Harvard psychologists have evolved these ideas in
> Multiple-Intelligence theory [and make chess an illustration of one
> intelligence of 8] and also assert that the skill to perceive patterns is
> already in the student, though it remains dormant or latent until
> activated
> in the right way, and then it can be 'trained' by others to express itself
> cogently. [see the works of Howard Gardner]. MI theory is now well
> established and accepted in US schools [though usually only employed for
> 'difficult' students]
>
> This is what Nunn refers in his book that illustrates techniques of
> tournament players. He says the potential is fixed and people dont live up
> to it. Nunn thoughts are reflections of MI theory - but I feel the
> importance is how much you can derive out of Your Stimuli for encountering
> a
> particular problem- be it in chess position / education / culture.
>
> *Therefore, I would challenge the statement that chess is /only/ some
> rational procedure of calculation, since the rational part is in
> processing
> the non-rational pattern recognition.*
>
> Agreed! but Are we just satisfied with this claim! No- We are interested
> in
> How it is applicable in a specific case. I want to side the general
> subjective case measurably and show the evolution of an agent in this
> environment. I see my work as 'Applied' than to mere cognitive! thats
> where,
> I assume lot of imagination to be true, because I believe that there are
> some processes that synthesize these thoughts from mundane stimuli of
> pieces
> in contrast terrain(black and white).
> ray@iinet.com.au
> www.iinet.com.au/~ray
|
| | |
Date: 18 Jul 2007 01:30:55
From: Ray Johnstone
Subject: Re: de Groot
|
On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 13:41:36 GMT, "Chess One" <innes8@verizon.net >
wrote:
>
>"Ray Johnstone" <ray@iinet.com.au> wrote in message
>news:3ecm93159ah05fbq6j0viqjntrpm9dk1kr@4ax.com...
>>I vaguely remember that de Groot in his book "Thought and Choice in
>> Chess" says there are about fifty thousand types of chess position.
>> But just where?
>
>He said there were 75,000 //patterns// [nb. not positions] known to the
>/master/ level player.
>
>I'm not sure where on the web you can access de Groot [Adrian] - but in
>terms of mainstream publications, see Gardner; Multiple Intelligence Theory
>material - where chess is cited extensively as illustration of 'Abstract
>Spatial Inntelligence'
Thanks. I have the book so if you know the page number that would help
further.
ray@iinet.com.au
www.iinet.com.au/~ray
|
|
