|
Main
Date: 29 Apr 2006 18:57:30
From: Ruud
Subject: What is human-like chessplay in engine-land?
|
Many times in several newsgroups and forums I've read questions, references and advice about chess-engines/programs that are supposed to play 'human-like' chess. (Very often Rebel/ProDeo comes up in these cases, btw.). Chess being a somewhat mathematical game, I've never understood these reks. Besides, several humans play different styles and types of chess, so that could also be the case with programs, which after all are developed by (different) humans. I often thought it was because some engines make positional mistakes (human-like), or the tactical accuracy of engines , making them sometimes nasty to play (robot-like), but I believe these 2 are both present in Chess-engines, so that cannot be it. Am I overlooking something here?
|
|
|
Date: 24 May 2006 03:23:58
From: mattt
Subject: Re: What is human-like chessplay in engine-land?
|
Ruud <[email protected] > wrote in message news:[email protected]... > Many times in several newsgroups and forums I've read questions, references > and advice about chess-engines/programs that are supposed to play > 'human-like' chess. (Very often Rebel/ProDeo comes up in these cases, btw.). > Chess being a somewhat mathematical game, I've never understood these > reks. Besides, several humans play different styles and types of chess, > so that could also be the case with programs, which after all are developed > by (different) humans. > I often thought it was because some engines make positional mistakes > (human-like), or the tactical accuracy of engines , making them sometimes > nasty to play (robot-like), but I believe these 2 are both present in > Chess-engines, so that cannot be it. > Am I overlooking something here? > > Computer Chess playing programs initially played with a ruthless attacking style, where they always attacked, attacked, attacked. Over time these programs have developed a positional style where the all-out attacking methods have been restrained some while adding intelligent choices to the playing style. The "human" quality seems (in my opinion) to be found when the program is not always playing with severe attacks at all times, but instead seems to have a developing plan, and where the choices for moves have variety, and where it plays artistically. I have various Chess programs, and I can remember when I first got Shredder 6 how much I enjoyed its playing style because it did not just play extreme attacking moves immediately at all times, but develops a careful stategic game that would take me by surprise. I still enjoy losing to it. :) I have Rebel (various dos versions and the windows version) and I have really liked this program from day 1 also, very nice playing style. I don't equate playing weak to playing with human style necessarily. You can see a somewhat mechanical choice of moves when playing against a handheld chess computer more so than many of the new Chess playing programs - at least I see this somewhat from my $15 Excalibur portable. I think that many authors of chess programs have gone a long way to introduce some human qualities to gameplay. I have Junior 9 which I really like, and feel the authors put some good work into its playing style, which has human qualities. Deep Sjeng would be another, having personalities to choose from. ChessMaster 9000 has a whole lot of personalities with blends of human and borg type play, but also offers low to GM strength levels so you can dial in your choice (good when you want a fighting chance to win). I like the playing some GM levels of CM, then bounce down to lower level players to practice tactics, opening/midgame/endgame, and to win from time to time. The Lasker GM is a fun one among many of the others. I like reviewing GM games from the past masters, then trying to play their representations in CM. Hiarcs 9 has human qualities, but they seem to be that of Kasparov to me because it is very strong. I do like the wealth of opening knowledge - very nice to have many openings choices. It is true that human play does not fall easily into a specific pattern - this can be seen by looking at different styles: Morphy, Alekhine, Lasker, Capablanca, among many others. Each played a great game, each had different methods, many shared the same methods, but overall they all played the game differently. All human, alike and yet different. A computer really has a tough example to try and live up to, especially with the method most commonly used for programming, which mostly consists of testing a great many moves to a certain depth, discarding moves that lead to bad outcomes, choosing the best from a set of good outcomes. The computer applies a brute force approach where it evaluates as many moves as quickly as possible to reach a conclusion. The programmers do find ways of improving the game play and also to enhance the playing style to the degree that the program can play with more human like style. When they do this it is quite an accomplishment. I have noticed different playing styles between many chess programs, and even more so by using settings or opponents available within each program. It makes different programs fun to play against for the variety. A person sees patterns, uses imagination, remembers previous outcomes based on the same or similiar moves and patterns on the board. A person can have the edge because of creativity, but it is the computer that has the greater memory (usually), more knowledge of variations, and it does not tire or overlook most weaknesses. A person may be more inclined to use the sacrifice to win, where a computer may not always see the expected result of the sacrifice. The human player will understand some chess positions more fully because we have a real brain, where the computer may not understand it in depth. Obviously the strength of the human player does play a factor into this. I myself am still working at attaining many of those GM qualities (maybe someday). my thoughts, matt
|
|
Date: 06 May 2006 21:45:49
From: The Man Behind The Curtain
Subject: Re: What is human-like chessplay in engine-land?
|
The Turk. John -- Von Herzen, moge es wieder zu Herzen gehen. --Beethoven
|
|