It's sort of reassuring to think that a human flaw is actually what made Deep Blue successful. After all, a human mistake in the development of the software led to the machine's victory. It's tempting to think there's a lesson here about human nature. "He had never considered that it was simply a bug." "Kasparov had concluded that the counterintuitive play must be a sign of superior intelligence," Campbell told Silver. The irony is that the move had messed with Kasporav's mind, and there was no one to fix this bug. The machine made a mistake, then they made sure it wouldn't do it again. The IBM team did tweak the algorithms between games, but part of what they were doing was fixing the bug that resulted in that unexpected move. That strange move was chalked up to these advantages. Because the machine had been heavily modified since he had last played it, he was essentially going in blind. Kasparov had no similar record of Big Blue's performance. They also had access to the full history of his previous public matches. Deep Blue's designers had the opportunity to tweak Deep Blue's programming between matches to adapt to Kasparov's style and strategy. Many chess masters have long claimed that Kasparov was at a significant disadvantage during the match.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |