←back to thread

365 points lawrenceyan | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.25s | source
Show context
tzs ◴[] No.41874291[source]
OT: what's the state of the art in non-GM level computer chess?

Say I want to play chess with an opponent that is at about the same skill level as me, or perhaps I want to play with an opponent about 100 rating points above me for training.

Most engines let you dumb them down by cutting search depth, but that usually doesn't work well. Sure, you end up beating them about half the time if you cut the search down enough but it generally feels like they were still outplaying you for much of the game and you won because they made one or two blunders.

What I want is a computer opponent that plays at a level of my choosing but plays a game that feels like that of a typical human player of that level.

Are there such engines?

replies(17): >>41874316 #>>41874396 #>>41874461 #>>41875345 #>>41875558 #>>41875838 #>>41875964 #>>41876292 #>>41876599 #>>41877326 #>>41877679 #>>41877852 #>>41879309 #>>41880419 #>>41881695 #>>41883667 #>>41888465 #
netdevnet ◴[] No.41877326[source]
How would you even go about making a model that can simulate a human chess skillset (saying levels implies that chess skillset is a scalar value while it is more reasonable to think of it as a tree of skills where your abilities might be higher or lower depend ending on the specific skill branch)
replies(1): >>41877649 #
anton-107 ◴[] No.41877649[source]
take millions of games of human players of certain rating only as your learning data?
replies(2): >>41877666 #>>41877962 #
1. netdevnet ◴[] No.41877666[source]
You are assuming that's going to be a reliable proxy, what would make you think that?