"Deus Ex Machina - article by Shay Bushinsky

[reflectionofpower]

"Deus Ex Machina — A Higher Creative Species in the Game of Chess"

This looks like an interesting article by Shay. I am going to take a nap and read it more fully.I scanned through it a little bit, interesting stuff.

https://www.aaai.org/ojs/index.php/aima ... /2255/2102

I just realized that "ban" on ICC is from Amir Ban, the co-programmer of Junior. You learn something new everyday.

[Albert Silver]

"Deus Ex Machina — A Higher Creative Species in the Game of Chess"

This looks like an interesting article by Shay. I am going to take a nap and read it more fully.I scanned through it a little bit, interesting stuff.

https://www.aaai.org/ojs/index.php/aima ... /2255/2102

I just realized that "ban" on ICC is from Amir Ban, the co-programmer of Junior. You learn something new everyday.

Just bear in mind it is dated 2009. AI and chess engines have developed by leaps and bounds in the last years. Watson and Deep Mind are prime examples for AI, and chess engine development has been anything but idle.

[reflectionofpower]

"Deus Ex Machina — A Higher Creative Species in the Game of Chess"

This looks like an interesting article by Shay. I am going to take a nap and read it more fully.I scanned through it a little bit, interesting stuff.

https://www.aaai.org/ojs/index.php/aima ... /2255/2102

I just realized that "ban" on ICC is from Amir Ban, the co-programmer of Junior. You learn something new everyday.

Just bear in mind it is dated 2009. AI and chess engines have developed by leaps and bounds in the last years. Watson and Deep Mind are prime examples for AI, and chess engine development has been anything but idle.

The article is dated but it is not a technical piece of programming so it not restrained by time. For instance we have anxieties about paying rent, making a living, providing for our family, health issues,etc. Society had these same problems in the 1900,1800,1700's and so on. The thrust of this article has to do with the concept of creativity from programs. Chess software can beat the best players in the world but what about their creativity?

I can think of some programs which are trying to do this without becoming like the mainstream, Junior, Chess System Tal,HIARCS,Deep Shredder,Fritz,Gandalf,Gull,Critter,Hannibal,KING,Houdini,Zarkov,Zappa,etc and there is much more out there that I haven't mentioned.

[Gerd Isenberg]

Thanks for posting. I was not aware of the article.

[reflectionofpower]

Thanks for posting. I was not aware of the article.

I can't recall anyone mentioning it on here in 2009 never mind today.

[Albert Silver]

"Deus Ex Machina — A Higher Creative Species in the Game of Chess"

This looks like an interesting article by Shay. I am going to take a nap and read it more fully.I scanned through it a little bit, interesting stuff.

https://www.aaai.org/ojs/index.php/aima ... /2255/2102

I just realized that "ban" on ICC is from Amir Ban, the co-programmer of Junior. You learn something new everyday.

Just bear in mind it is dated 2009. AI and chess engines have developed by leaps and bounds in the last years. Watson and Deep Mind are prime examples for AI, and chess engine development has been anything but idle.

The article is dated but it is not a technical piece of programming so it not restrained by time. For instance we have anxieties about paying rent, making a living, providing for our family, health issues,etc. Society had these same problems in the 1900,1800,1700's and so on. The thrust of this article has to do with the concept of creativity from programs. Chess software can beat the best players in the world but what about their creativity?

I can think of some programs which are trying to do this without becoming like the mainstream, Junior, Chess System Tal,HIARCS,Deep Shredder,Fritz,Gandalf,Gull,Critter,Hannibal,KING,Houdini,Zarkov,Zappa,etc and there is much more out there that I haven't mentioned.

I read the article. I see nothing in it regarding general problems in life such as you mentioned, and presume you are extrapolating intensively, or had still only scanned the article when you replied. This was my case as well, to be honest, but not now.

I think the 2009 date is extremely relevant as this was just a couple of years after one of the last head-to-head major matches between chess engines and humans. Bushinsky's concluding paragraph is very revealing:

"My hope is that, among those young emerging chess giants, there will be found one who is creative enough and familiar with the best chess programs and who will dare to challenge AI dominance over the game of chess."

It is strange that anyone would believe that time would somehow improve a human's prospects via creativity. In terms of chess engines, I see no creativity involved, and I do not mean this in any prejudiced way. I view a key concept of creativity as one of intent and evaluation: i.e. I know what is usual and am deliberately choosing an option that is not. As humans, we classify the engine's moves as creative or not, because of our ability to recognize them as non-conformist, but the engine that chose it did not. This is a subtle but important point IMO.

I think Deep Mind, the super Go program might be the first game playing program to break this paradigm and genuinely play creative moves, even if it did not use the word 'creative'. It was designed to be able to know what the typical human move was in a given situation, attributing probabilities to the options, and to generate a move of its own, and then attribute a probability to this as well: how likely or unlikely it estimated a human was to play it.

Thanks for bringing this article to light. It has inspired me to write a small article on it, which I will do later. Cheers!

[reflectionofpower]

"Deus Ex Machina — A Higher Creative Species in the Game of Chess"

This looks like an interesting article by Shay. I am going to take a nap and read it more fully.I scanned through it a little bit, interesting stuff.

https://www.aaai.org/ojs/index.php/aima ... /2255/2102

I just realized that "ban" on ICC is from Amir Ban, the co-programmer of Junior. You learn something new everyday.

Just bear in mind it is dated 2009. AI and chess engines have developed by leaps and bounds in the last years. Watson and Deep Mind are prime examples for AI, and chess engine development has been anything but idle.

The article is dated but it is not a technical piece of programming so it not restrained by time. For instance we have anxieties about paying rent, making a living, providing for our family, health issues,etc. Society had these same problems in the 1900,1800,1700's and so on. The thrust of this article has to do with the concept of creativity from programs. Chess software can beat the best players in the world but what about their creativity?

I can think of some programs which are trying to do this without becoming like the mainstream, Junior, Chess System Tal,HIARCS,Deep Shredder,Fritz,Gandalf,Gull,Critter,Hannibal,KING,Houdini,Zarkov,Zappa,etc and there is much more out there that I haven't mentioned.

I read the article. I see nothing in it regarding general problems in life such as you mentioned, and presume you are extrapolating intensively, or had still only scanned the article when you replied. This was my case as well, to be honest, but not now.

You said it was dated 2009 and a lot of advancements have been made since then and I agree on the advancements of AI. I just used an analogy as to time restriction.

[reflectionofpower]

Good article Albert. I didn't catch when you posted yesterday that you was going to write an article about this subject but when I logged on to Chessbase to see the chess news which I do every morning I seen the title and I went, hey, wait a minute. I was talking about this on talkchess so this has to be Albert Silver's baby!

[Albert Silver]

Good article Albert. I didn't catch when you posted yesterday that you was going to write an article about this subject but when I logged on to Chessbase to see the chess news which I do every morning I seen the title and I went, hey, wait a minute. I was talking about this on talkchess so this has to be Albert Silver's baby!

[reflectionofpower]

Good article Albert. I didn't catch when you posted yesterday that you was going to write an article about this subject but when I logged on to Chessbase to see the chess news which I do every morning I seen the title and I went, hey, wait a minute. I was talking about this on talkchess so this has to be Albert Silver's baby!

The last 2 paragraphs are well said,

http://en.chessbase.com/post/machine-cr ... t-it-isn-t

"The conclusion was simple: AlphaGo not only knew what was standard for human play, but through its own search and judgement deviated from those choices to deliberately play what was initially considered a move a human was highly unlikely to play. While there might be cases in other fields where this level of judgement and creativity has been shown, this example of DeepMind’s AlphaGo nonetheless leaves no doubt.

Where does that leave mankind? Another lost battle? Hardly. The flaw is in even considering this a battle at all, either to win or to lose. Creativity is not about winning or losing, but understanding that no matter how much we know, there is always something more, something we had not considered, and it is upon realizing this that we embrace the mirabilia of the infinite."

Written by Albert Silver

PS) I hope I didn't break any copyright laws. I put the link there and your acknowledgement as haven written the article.

So maybe through artificial means chess programs can utilize some pseudo form of creativity in their selection of moves as did AlphaGo. I guess the intuition aspect would be learning features embedded in the programs but on a very small scale?