If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Japan Times)   For first time in history, shogi computer defeats active professional shogi player. Unlike Kasparov, this guy did not flounce around whining about a fix   (japantimes.co.jp) divider line 12
    More: Interesting, Fujitsu  
•       •       •

1860 clicks; posted to Geek » on 01 Apr 2013 at 10:10 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



12 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-04-01 09:15:42 AM
I know those words, but that headline makes no sense

/If this is obscure to you then you dont watch enough TV
 
2013-04-01 10:23:36 AM
To those curious, not this isn't like go.
 
upload.wikimedia.org
 
2013-04-01 10:26:41 AM
So it's smarter than the average computer?
 
2013-04-01 10:34:43 AM
I would think that a computer should be able to beat or draw the best human players at any non-random, fixed move game (checkers, chess, go, etc.) 100% of the time.  If it can't, either the game is flawed or the computer isn't programmed well.
 
2013-04-01 10:42:39 AM

Yes please: I would think that a computer should be able to beat or draw the best human players at any non-random, fixed move game (checkers, chess, go, etc.) 100% of the time.  If it can't, either the game is flawed or the computer isn't programmed well.


Why, it stands to reason...
 
/so logical!
 
2013-04-01 11:12:32 AM

Yes please: I would think that a computer should be able to beat or draw the best human players at any non-random, fixed move game (checkers, chess, go, etc.) 100% of the time.  If it can't, either the game is flawed or the computer isn't programmed well.


It was Ben Finney!
 
2013-04-01 11:32:52 AM

Yes please: I would think that a computer should be able to beat or draw the best human players at any non-random, fixed move game (checkers, chess, go, etc.) 100% of the time.  If it can't, either the game is flawed or the computer isn't programmed well.


The issue isn't a flawed game or flawed programming (in other words, a theoretical issue) -- it's that the number of possible game states in games like these exceed the number of atoms in the universe. A computer can only brute-force through so much of a move-tree given a game's time controls. The limitation is raw processing power.
 
Chess computers weren't able to beat grandmaster-level players until the 1990s, and high-end processing power was required to do it. Now, someone who owns a standard quad-core computer running the freeware engine Rybka has a computer with an Elo rating about 240 points higher than the current best human (~3110 vs. ~2870).
 
Checkers has significantly fewer game states, but was only solved about 2007 (and determined to be a draw with perfect play).
 
Shogi computers started beating grandmasters around 2010.
 
2013-04-01 12:30:03 PM

Yes please: I would think that a computer should be able to beat or draw the best human players at any non-random, fixed move game (checkers, chess, go, etc.) 100% of the time.  If it can't, either the game is flawed or the computer isn't programmed well.


Basically a matter of how long it takes to solve the game, and whether it takes more than two players. Once you introduce that third player, the strategy trees just get overwhelming.
 
2013-04-01 01:05:57 PM
Shogi is more difficult for a computer to win than chess.  Two big reasons are that the board is bigger (9x9 rather than 8x8) and that the number of pieces does not go down as the game progresses.
 
2013-04-01 01:11:12 PM

Myria: Shogi is more difficult for a computer to win than chess.  Two big reasons are that the board is bigger (9x9 rather than 8x8) and that the number of pieces does not go down as the game progresses.


That was the first thing I thought of.  I'm trying to learn Shogi, and the idea of using captured pieces as your own does open up a lot more possibilites than a computer can handle.
 
2013-04-01 02:00:24 PM
Also, ultimately, human programmers are entering the code that allows the hardware to beat another human in the first place. So far.
 
2013-04-03 12:28:55 AM

Yes please: I would think that a computer should be able to beat or draw the best human players at any non-random, fixed move game (checkers, chess, go, etc.) 100% of the time.  If it can't, either the game is flawed or the computer isn't programmed well.


You can count the number of board positions for tic-tac-toe pretty quickly, and also quickly derive strategy for the possible moves. Checkers is just simple enough for modern computers to crack it. Chess is still far out there. Shogi out there still by an order of magnitude. Logically possible? Yes. With today's tech? No. And devising an algorithm that's on the opposite end of the scale from trial and error requires math that looks like magic to even relatively smart people.
 
Displayed 12 of 12 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report