When will the chess programmers write an engine that plans ?

[zullil]

I do not disagree. You are right. The AI science moved away. But I still think chess engines are stupid. Although they have 3400 ELO they are not playing chess but using brute force search to „solve“ it.

LC0 is the evidence for me that it is possible to build strategy over tactics and still play decent human chess.

It’s IMO a shame that a NN has to teach humans that human engines are stupid.

LC0 showed that Stockfish is an idiot.

I don't understand why you believe Lc0 (which is a fascinating chess-playing entity) is using "strategy". It's doing something like image processing on chess diagrams, and "discovering" what "patterns" lead to a higher probability of winning. Is that strategizing or planning?

[Ovyron]

Guys. The idea is to get Artificial intelligence.

Suppose that someone manages to create software that "plans" in the way you want, and it manages to play the same moves of Magnus Carslen. Then what? We already had access to his moves, we wouldn't have anything that we don't have.

The world is full of machines that are capable of imitating human plans and human chess play perfectly, those machines are called "humans", creating an artificial one would be a waste of time, just ask someone on the streets to make a chess move.

What would be useful is creating something that plays chess on a never seen before level that defeats everything else seen before, and for that Stockfish and Leela are on the right path.

[BrendanJNorman]

If you're saying you gained 800 Elo in one year, yet you aren't willing to prove it, your story is paper-thin bro.

I never said improved that much, I just said that I improved some hundreds of elo points, and now can reach winning positions against 2300 guys now and then (just yesterday I reached a winning position against a 2100 guy WITH EASE on a 5 0 game, and then I proceeded to lose it with some tactic that I missed...)

Look Uly, it's very simple:

Regardless of how many points, you are saying that after having a peak rating of 1600 or so for more than a decade, you have now jumped hundreds of Elo points in a single year and (on your mysterious NEW liChess account) can now EASILY handle 2100-2300 guys.

I'm willing to believe it, but the fact that you won't even share your liChess account so as to put skepticism to rest is pretty damning.

I'll even go first...here you are: https://lichess.org/@/ChessNCognac_com/perf/blitz

That's my blitz profile.

Where is yours?

I'll be impressed (legitimately) even if you even got up to 1800, but the way you're behaving is impossible to believe.

I'm pretty sure anybody in my position would be the same.

[JohnW]

How do Lc0 and Stockfish differ in regards to solving mate problems?
Say there is a mate in 10 puzzle, is Lc0 really going to strategize or plan?

[Dann Corbit]

Real artificial intelligence will take a lot more horsepower even than our GPUs.
https://www.quora.com/If-the-human-brai ... mputer-Why
"If the human brain were a computer, it could perform 38 thousand trillion operations per second. The world’s most powerful supercomputer, BlueGene, can manage only .002% of that." But, we cannot perform like a supercomputer. Why?"
So consider:
38,000,000,000,000,000,000 is 38 exaflops. The world's most powerful computer is .2 exaflops.

So if you want actual understanding (e.g. Deeper Blue has literally no idea that it won) you will have a very long wait.

If you just want really good chess, we have that today. And like Inigo Montoya, "I hate waiting."

[Ovyron]

I'll be impressed (legitimately) even if you even got up to 1800, but the way you're behaving is impossible to believe.

What if it was on rapid? Suddenly only blitz ratings matter?

[BrendanJNorman]

I'll be impressed (legitimately) even if you even got up to 1800, but the way you're behaving is impossible to believe.

What if it was on rapid? Suddenly only blitz ratings matter?

...just yesterday I reached a winning position against a 2100 guy WITH EASE on a 5 0 game...

[jp]

I do not disagree. You are right. The AI science moved away. But I still think chess engines are stupid. Although they have 3400 ELO they are not playing chess but using brute force search to „solve“ it.

LC0 is the evidence for me that it is possible to build strategy over tactics and still play decent human chess.

It’s IMO a shame that a NN has to teach humans that human engines are stupid.

LC0 showed that Stockfish is an idiot.

I don't understand why you believe Lc0 (which is a fascinating chess-playing entity) is using "strategy". It's doing something like image processing on chess diagrams, and "discovering" what "patterns" lead to a higher probability of winning. Is that strategizing or planning?

Yes. If SF is an idiot, then Leela is also an idiot.

mclane said he wants no computation, and Leela is doing massive computation.

Intelligence is the absence of computation.

If you just want really good chess, we have that today.

But clearly mclane does not just want really good chess. He wants something else, or something more.

[BrendanJNorman]

But clearly mclane does not just want really good chess. He wants something else, or something more.

It sounds like he wants the engine to be sentient, which as Dan said, will not be possible for a LOOOOONG time.

[zullil]

But clearly mclane does not just want really good chess. He wants something else, or something more.

It sounds like he wants the engine to be sentient, which as Dan said, will not be possible for a LOOOOONG time.

If an engine were sentient, and wanted to play chess well, it would likely install Stockfish and Lc0.