1

Wired magazine recently said

Most remarkably, AlphaZero uncovered new approaches to the game that dazzled chess experts.

Just what was unique about alpha zero that was so dazzling?

  • 1
    Does this answer your question? How is Alpha Zero "more human"? – Ellie Feb 21 at 21:22
  • dont know. Wired did not tell us what Kasparov mean by dazzling which I took to be more than super human. – edwina oliver Feb 21 at 21:27
  • 1
    again some coward downvotes a question just because I asked it – edwina oliver Feb 21 at 23:00
  • 5
    I'm downvoting your question because it's short on details. For example, right now, I could equally write an answer that says "because AlphaZero was the first strong NN-based engine". – Allure Feb 21 at 23:32
  • 4
    1) You didn't link the Wired article 2) you didn't specify what experts they were, they could be chess-playing experts, or chess engine experts 3) with no context, "new approaches" can mean anything from openings to search algorithm. So yeah, -1. – Allure Feb 22 at 1:23
2

I could find nothing that would support that statement beyond that it taught itself in a day. This is speculation, but I believe it explains that line in the article.

After researching the author, I found that he is a technology writer, who got a Bachelor of Science from the University of Kent, and later a degree in journalism from University of the Arts London. He currently writes for "Wired", and previously wrote for the MIT Technology Review. Despite that, I could not find a FIDE rating from when he lived in Europe, nor a USCF rating now that he lives in Cambridge Massachusetts.

I get the sense that it could be a "civilian", meaning a guy, who likes chess, but plays chess very casually, who is trying to write an article, and not really understanding the subject fully. It is akin to watching people on TV try to sound like they know about chess.

I think he was simply using his own words to regurgitate the amazement that we chess players all felt when we heard that AlphaZero taught itself in a day, and already could beat the best program, Stockfish.

  • 2
    possibly. i upvoted your answer that some cowardly churl downvoted for daring to answer a question i posted. – edwina oliver Feb 21 at 22:59
  • 1
    I agree, it is based on some conjecture. Thanks for making up for the downvote. – PhishMaster Feb 21 at 23:10
  • rereading the question i am wondering if the experts being dazzled might be AI/Programmers not chess GMs. that could make your answer more likely to be at least partially correct if not the answer. – edwina oliver Feb 22 at 1:13
  • 1
    I think the statement is clear that they meant chess players not programmers. – PhishMaster Feb 22 at 1:15
  • I am not sure what he meant as it could be read either way. – edwina oliver Feb 22 at 1:40

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.