5 ms·
> How is it ensured that this is a fair game given the time constraints? Both players get the same time controls, seems fair to me But if you're saying humans
by zodiac 11y ago
> How is it ensured that this is a fair game given the time constraints?
Both players get the same time controls, seems fair to me
But if you're saying humans might fare better against computers in a game with a longer time control, I suspect that's true
- 0x777 11y agoWith longer time controls, wouldn't the human element of 'coming under pressure' has little effect?
- GolDDranks 11y agoActually, Fan Hui 2p, the European master was able to win agains AlphaGo in an unofficial "Speed Go" (30 seconds per move) tournament. It seems that additional time might actually work _against_ humans and for AlphaGo.
- kqr 11y agoThat said, Fan Hui did better against AlphaGo in the inofficial blitz games they played!
- jacquesm 11y agoTime is not a good measure when competing with parallel hardware. Joules would be a much better one.
- hughperkins 11y agoThis is very insightful. Id like to mod you up ten times if i could :)
- dzdt 11y agoI think it is the other way around. The human's strength is intuition and insight. They can look at a move and have a good understanding of strengths and weaknesses of positions by "feel" developed by long practice of the game. More time doesn't really help this much. Another part of the game is "reading" -- playing out scenarios of response and counter-response to evaluate how strong a move is. The computer excels at this, because it can play out as many moves as its computation time allows and remember all the results with complete accuracy. Humans are slower and prone to mistakes when they do lots of reading. So adding clock time lets the computer increase its advantage over the human in reading depth, but doesn't so much increase the human's advantage of intuition and insight.