On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 6:20 PM, Brian Sheppard <[email protected]> wrote:
> Amazing! Basically, it is your opinion that in a match betweer Rybka and > a human champion like Anand or Carlsen, the computer would win 80% of games, > and draw the rest? That a human world champion would be unable to draw even > half of his games, even given White to start? > Yes, that's what I'm saying. > > It is too hard to believe, IMO. In the absence of a match, the explanation > of drift in an isolated rating system is a more believable theory. > The drift is not that much, but it is there. I have seen it happen before then when things happen quickly, it takes the human brain time to adjust and we do not quickly let go of cherished beliefs. 5 years ago it was not like this, but it is now. The superiority of the computer is now quite huge. Many years ago there was a player in our area who was rated something like 1200 or so and he played like this for years. But at some point he suddenly started taking chess seriously and studying seriously and became something like a 2300 master. I could not help but notice that it took a lot of players (in some cases) YEARS to adjust to this. They thought it was a fluke but even when it was maintained and then improved upon some players refused to believe it. A local master lost 3 games in a row to this player and still refused to admit that he was a master and blamed all the losses on his own play - refusing to give him any credit because it did not seem credible to him. Even though the computer superiority seems sudden, computers have probably been superior for a few years now. Don't forget that it was 13 years ago that Deep Blue beat Kasparov. Even though that may have been a fluke, it did not take long for PC machines to "catch" Deep Blue and then go way past it. Even 13 years ago I do not believe that computers were that far behind Deep Blue - Deep Blue had a good tournament record but did not win every tournament and occasionally lost to PC programs. I think it was probably only 300 ELO above the very best programs at most. > > Brian > > ------------------------------ > *From:* [email protected] [mailto: > [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Don Dailey > *Sent:* Sunday, October 31, 2010 2:42 PM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [Computer-go] new predictions? > > > On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 2:30 PM, Jacques Basaldúa <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Don Dailey wrote: >> >> To the best I can estimate it is something like 300 ELO >>> now which means in a short match there is almost no chance >>> >> > for the human. >> >> It is more than that, around 500. Only a match with a handheld >> device could be seen as similar strength: >> > > I'm being ultra conservative when I say 300 and I consider it an absolute > lower bound. The reason one must be careful is that there is some slop in > equating computers to humans. Computers have their own ratings lists > which attempt to be in line with human ratings but it is widely believed > that the top programs have some distortion - in other words they are a bit > over rated compared to humans. Programs that are a few hundred ELO weaker > are not over-rated but the top ones are. Computer vs Computer can > produce these distortions. > > So 300 is the lowest figure I would be willing to stake my life on - but I > believe it's probably more like 400 or maybe even your 500 value. Larry > Kaufman has produced a formula that he thinks will give more accurate ELO > ratings to the top machines, it basically compresses the ratings of program > with more than a certain ELO and I forget how it works. I don't think it > removes more than 100 ELO so maybe 400 is pretty close to the right value - > but in either case I think it's absolutely clear than computers are > superior and it's not even close. > > Don > > > > > > >> >> Top humans are near 2800 (ratings.fide.com) >> >> Rank Name Title Country Rating Games B-Year >> 1 Carlsen, Magnus g NOR 2826 0 1990 >> 2 Topalov, Veselin g BUL 2803 0 1975 >> 3 Anand, Viswanathan g IND 2800 0 >> >> Google for Rybka elo: >> >> On a phone: >> >> Pocket Rybka 3: 2869 ELO on PocketPC? 23 Aug 2008 >> >> 17.01.2009 Deep Rybka 3 x64 2GB Q6600 2.4 3227 >> >> I read somewhere (ICGA Journal I think) that it is over >> 3300 now. >> >> So about 500 points over the top human. >> >> >> Jacques. >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Computer-go mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Computer-go mailing list > [email protected] > http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go >
_______________________________________________ Computer-go mailing list [email protected] http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
