Timeline for Why do chess engines cause immediate draws rather than giving the opponent the opportunity to blunder or run out of time?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 25, 2023 at 15:52 | comment | added | supercat | A more interesting notion would be allowing an engine to be configured to maximize the value of practice an opponent might gain by playing against it. If there is a situation where an opponent could force a draw with perfect play that was genuinely hard to find, but would otherwise lose, having a chess engine put its opponent in a position of having to find the difficult plays could be more useful than simply moving onto the next game, but if none of the required plays are difficult, going for the longer draw would simply waste the player's time. | |
| Jun 29, 2021 at 20:37 | comment | added | dilaudid | @Mobeus Zoom By AI I meant the old sense - any algorithm, not necessarily a sophisticated model. A very simple way would be to adjust contempt linearly depending on the estimated quality of the opponent's moves. This may or may not work. Another method would be to try to infer the opponent's next move, given their previous moves - so rather than train their model to win, train it to imitate opponents based on real play data. Here's some research on this | |
| Jun 29, 2021 at 19:26 | comment | added | Mobeus Zoom | very interesting but I've never heard of AI (neural networks at least) being used for contempt. Can you expand your idea - how exactly could the engine build up 'a model' of the opponent, playing any differently to the moves the engine considers optimal? | |
| Jun 28, 2021 at 19:16 | review | First posts | |||
| Jun 28, 2021 at 19:40 | |||||
| Jun 28, 2021 at 19:08 | history | answered | dilaudid | CC BY-SA 4.0 |