3 ms·

It does strike me that neither Kasparov nor Lee Sedol insisted to see any play history of their AI opponents. Not that it would have changed anything, but it's

It does strike me that neither Kasparov nor Lee Sedol insisted to see any play history of their AI opponents. Not that it would have changed anything, but it's kind of silly to go into any situation one side has the other's entire history, while the other side has nothing. Not exactly fair.

jaredhansen 9y ago
That's part of the point. Being able to review a lifetime's worth of history in a short period of time is one of the things at which AI is better than humans.
- strebler 9y ago
  My point was that neither AI group shared any play history at all, even when Kasparov asked specifically for it. If the AI is so good, what do they have to hide? Lee Sedol won a game too, so perhaps if he had had similar level of play history as it had for him, he could have discovered and exploited its weaknesses.
datagram 9y ago
Sounded to me like Kasparov did ask to see match history: Going into the match, Kasparov was frustrated that IBM had not shared printouts of Deep Blue’s practice games. He felt at a disadvantage because in a contest with any human, he would have a long history of match performance and would be able to tailor a strategy against that person’s tendencies and weaknesses.
- LanceH 9y ago
  When he lost was during that time when there was a split between FIDE and PCA. I've always wondered if there was some leverage there that IBM could have just gone to the PCA champ for the match instead. As reigning champ, he should have been able to dictate terms to IBM, not the other way around. PCA would have jumped at the idea of having IBM spending a ton of money claiming theirs was the true champion. My personal view is that computers should have to play candidate matches as well to get to a championship match. Well, should have, it's a moot point now that the desktop can beat the GM's. Last I looked, computers didn't evaluate their own opening book. They are basically programmed not to play certain things. Computers should only be allowed opening books built by computers. I'm really curious if novelties would develop.
  - gmiller123456 9y ago
    "My personal view is that computers should have to play candidate matches as well to get to a championship match" Important point is that this was not a championship match, it was just a regular exhibition match. The world champions play a lot of players in such tournaments and matches outside of the championship circuit. I doubt a computer will ever be allowed in the championship circuit .
- strebler 9y ago
  Yes, I saw that he asked but didn't insist. As in "I'm not participating if the playing field isn't level". It appears both were somewhat overly confident, so neither really pushed for this.

jaredhansen 9y ago

That's part of the point. Being able to review a lifetime's worth of history in a short period of time is one of the things at which AI is better than humans.

strebler 9y ago
My point was that neither AI group shared any play history at all, even when Kasparov asked specifically for it. If the AI is so good, what do they have to hide? Lee Sedol won a game too, so perhaps if he had had similar level of play history as it had for him, he could have discovered and exploited its weaknesses.

datagram 9y ago

Sounded to me like Kasparov did ask to see match history: Going into the match, Kasparov was frustrated that IBM had not shared printouts of Deep Blue’s practice games. He felt at a disadvantage because in a contest with any human, he would have a long history of match performance and would be able to tailor a strategy against that person’s tendencies and weaknesses.

LanceH 9y ago
When he lost was during that time when there was a split between FIDE and PCA. I've always wondered if there was some leverage there that IBM could have just gone to the PCA champ for the match instead. As reigning champ, he should have been able to dictate terms to IBM, not the other way around. PCA would have jumped at the idea of having IBM spending a ton of money claiming theirs was the true champion. My personal view is that computers should have to play candidate matches as well to get to a championship match. Well, should have, it's a moot point now that the desktop can beat the GM's. Last I looked, computers didn't evaluate their own opening book. They are basically programmed not to play certain things. Computers should only be allowed opening books built by computers. I'm really curious if novelties would develop.
- gmiller123456 9y ago
  "My personal view is that computers should have to play candidate matches as well to get to a championship match" Important point is that this was not a championship match, it was just a regular exhibition match. The world champions play a lot of players in such tournaments and matches outside of the championship circuit. I doubt a computer will ever be allowed in the championship circuit .
strebler 9y ago
Yes, I saw that he asked but didn't insist. As in "I'm not participating if the playing field isn't level". It appears both were somewhat overly confident, so neither really pushed for this.