06 Feb 10
Originally posted by MontyMooseI agree with Monty in the case of strong engines used to their maximum capabilities. However, how about the scenario where a patzer uses an amateur engine that isn't all that strong, or he uses an engine that can be "dumbed down" somewhat. (The Hamsters engine even has blunder settings!) I suspect detecting that kind of activity would take a different approach.
Chess engines are made and sold to WIN games by playing close to perfect tactical moves. There is where cheating can be detected.
06 Feb 10
Originally posted by Mad RookI wish more of the cheats would use the 'dumber' settings. I'd actually have a chance to win.
I agree with Monty in the case of strong engines used to their maximum capabilities. However, how about the scenario where a patzer uses an amateur engine that isn't all that strong, or he uses an engine that can be "dumbed down" somewhat. (The Hamsters engine even has blunder settings!) I suspect detecting that kind of activity would take a different approach.
06 Feb 10
Originally posted by ChessJesterI haven't been caught yet. 😛
Here is my question for discussion:
If chess engines continue to increase their skill and eventually become able to emulate human thinking, won't it then only be a matter of time before it becomes an impossibility to detect engine users on sites like RHP?
Of course there will come a time when a computer can be set to play at 1600 or 1800 or 2000.
But the person playing (the Cheat) can get whatever twisted pleasure they want from it because if the chess engine is that good to emulate a 1600 or 1800 0r 2000 it will make no difference to the opponent's enjoyment.
06 Feb 10
Originally posted by wolfgang59In order for a computer to play at a certain level (not his best, that is) he would have to understand the difficulties players have at every level, and therefore play more human like, don't you agree?
I haven't been caught yet. 😛
Of course there will come a time when a computer can be set to play at 1600 or 1800 or 2000.
But the person playing (the Cheat) can get whatever twisted pleasure they want from it because if the chess engine is that good to emulate a 1600 or 1800 0r 2000 it will make no difference to the opponent's enjoyment.
- Joined
- 25 Jul 07
- Moves
- 27921
06 Feb 10
1 edit
Originally posted by WulebgrTrue, but they can still be instructive to play against. The 1600-1800 personalities in Chessmaster tend to follow this pattern:
Dumbed down engines are notoriously non-humanlike.
1) Play the first few moves normally
2) Exchange a minor piece for a pawn, so the engine is now a piece down
3) Then start playing properly
It's an interesting experience. Against a human player of that level, once I'm a piece up I'd basically consider the game won. Chessmaster isn't unbeatable a piece down, but I really need to concentrate and not play any sloppy moves. A useful exercise.
So .. I agree that the above is very un-humanlike, but can be fun play against!
06 Feb 10
Originally posted by WulebgrThat may be true for now, but who's to say that dumbed-down engines won't get more humanlike in the future? This subject isn't a high priority with the chess engine programmers, but a few people continue to dabble with it. Here's a thread on the CCC forum that I thought was interesting:
Dumbed down engines are notoriously non-humanlike.
http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=21264
06 Feb 10
Originally posted by Mad RookIf there are enough people that want to cheat, perhaps they can create a market to encourage these programmers.
That may be true for now, but who's to say that dumbed-down engines won't get more humanlike in the future? This subject isn't a high priority with the chess engine programmers, but a few people continue to dabble with it. Here's a thread on the CCC forum that I thought was interesting:
http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=21264
06 Feb 10
Originally posted by WulebgrGood one! 🙂
If there are enough people that want to cheat, perhaps they can create a market to encourage these programmers.
Of course, I'm giving the programmers the benefit of the doubt and assuming that their intentions are to create engines that would allow a weak player to play an engine with both the hope of winning and the experience of playing at least a somewhat humanlike opponent. Any cheating aspect would be an unintended consequence.