Chess will never be solved, here's why

Sort:
Avatar of MEGACHE3SE
Optimissed wrote:
tygxc wrote:

@7775

"your 10^17 calculation relies on a pre existing algorithm that creates the best move for ____ on any given position"
++ No, the calculation does not rely on any evaluation algorithm to find the best move.
Many here still do not understand that.


Still do not understand? After what explanation? I don't see one.

An evaluation algorithm is an absolute essential and none exists that's fully reliable.

It relies on the 7-men endgame table base and on its absolute evaluations draw / win / loss.

That's an absolute equivalent to calculating all the way to checkmate. Since the seven man table base was an easy project compared with this, then logically, relying on calculating to that doesn't save any time worth speaking of. Also, it's such a massive amount of calculation that it's necessary to make evaluations on lines in order to cut most of them out and so an algorithm is an absolute necessity.

You've changed your story entirely, since a couple of months ago. You were relying on the Stockfish algorithm, which is obviously incapable of the job but still you were relying on it.

 


If a calculated series of moves reaches a 7-men endgame table base draw,
then that validates all black moves as fit to achieve the game-theoretic value of the draw.
As for the white moves, all reasonable alternatives need to be explored, not just one.

But you wouldn't even know if they were the best (optimal) moves. How could you possibly untangle them?

 

See?  u can refute without being a dingus.  

btw i am also sometimes a dingus so i will try to not get defensive if u call me out in the future.  i cant criticize ur tone without putting myself open to criticisem

Avatar of rishabh11great

In order for chess to be solved, an extremely strong engine needs to analyse an incredible 10^120 different games (estimation), a number higher than the number of atoms in the universe.

 Secondly, you never know if the present engine's recommendations are truly the absolute 'best' moves that are possible. Anyway, the progress chess engines have made is rather scary.  But, I don't know as chess with less than 7 pieces has already been solved, thanks to tablebases. We really should hope that chess never gets solved.

Avatar of tygxc

@7801

"how do you figure out which move it is?"
++ For black take the top 1 Stockfish engine move after enough calculation time and do not worry if it is correct or not. If it is correct then it will ultimately lead to a 7-men endgame table base draw and that validate  all black moves as fit to achieve the game-theoretic value of a draw.
If it is not correct, then some white move will lead to a 7-men endgame table base loss.

Likewise for white take the top w Stockfish engine moves. As previously calculated the table base exact move will be among the top w = 4 engine moves at 17 s/move on a 10^9 nodes/s engine with 1 error in 10^20 positions, i.e. no error in the 10^17 relevant positions.

Avatar of MEGACHE3SE

"Likewise for white take the top w Stockfish engine moves"

okay but what if all of the top stockfish moves are wrong?

Avatar of MEGACHE3SE
tygxc wrote:

@7801

"how do you figure out which move it is?"
++ For black take the top 1 Stockfish engine move after enough calculation time and do not worry if it is correct or not. If it is correct then it will ultimately lead to a 7-men endgame table base draw and that validate  all black moves as fit to achieve the game-theoretic value of a draw.
If it is not correct, then some white move will lead to a 7-men endgame table base loss.

Likewise for white take the top w Stockfish engine moves. As previously calculated the table base exact move will be among the top w = 4 engine moves at 17 s/move on a 10^9 nodes/s engine with 1 error in 10^20 positions, i.e. no error in the 10^17 relevant positions.

you are also making the assumption that black is not inherently winning, that hasnt been proven.  

Avatar of tygxc

@7806

"for chess to be solved, an extremely strong engine needs to analyse an incredible 10^120 different games (estimation), a number higher than the number of atoms in the universe."
++ No. There are only 10^44 legal positions, of which 10^17 are relevant to weakly solving chess. There are between 10^29241 and 10^34082 different Chess games.

"you never know if the present engine's recommendations are truly the absolute 'best' moves"
++ We do know. If a black move leads to a 7-men endgame table base draw, then it is good enough to achieve the game-theoretic value of a draw.
As for white moves we need to explore all reasonable moves that oppose to the draw.

"We really should hope that chess never gets solved."
++ If it is desirable or not is a different question. Ask the Checkers, Nine Men's Morris, Connect Four and Losing Chess players, whose favorite games have been weakly solved.

Avatar of MEGACHE3SE

ironically your assumptions of correct gameplay outcomes arent even connected to your core errors, but i feel it is important to point them out regardless.  

" If a black move leads to a 7-men endgame table base draw, then it is good enough to achieve the game-theoretic value of a draw."

you need to prove it leads to a draw or not, your explanation doesnt do that.  it just puts it off.

Avatar of tygxc

@7809

"black is not inherently winning, that hasnt been proven"
++ That is proven. See https://www.iccf.com/tables 
Assume Chess is a black or white win and try to fit a Poisson distribution of the number of errors per game such that the probability of an odd number of errors corresponds. It is impossible.
Assume Chess a draw and try to fit a Poisson distribution of the errors per game such that the probability of an odd number of errors per game is. It is possible and leads to >1000 perfect drawn games with optimal play from both sides.
White has the advantage of the initiative, worth 1 tempo, but not enough to win.

Avatar of rishabh11great
tygxc wrote:

@7806

"for chess to be solved, an extremely strong engine needs to analyse an incredible 10^120 different games (estimation), a number higher than the number of atoms in the universe."
++ No. There are only 10^44 legal positions, of which 10^17 are relevant to weakly solving chess. There are between 10^29241 and 10^34082 different Chess games.

"you never know if the present engine's recommendations are truly the absolute 'best' moves"
++ We do know. If a black move leads to a 7-men endgame table base draw, then it is good enough to achieve the game-theoretic value of a draw.
As for white moves we need to explore all reasonable moves that oppose to the draw.

"We really should hope that chess never gets solved."
++ If it is desirable or not is a different question. Ask the Checkers, Nine Men's Morris, Connect Four and Losing Chess players, whose favorite games have been weakly solved.

10^29241?? 💀

It is solved for a 7-piece endgame but not the entire game. You can't determine if a move suggest by Stockfish in a complex middle game truly the 'best' possible.

 Chess getting solved would be a disaster as it would end the beauty of this game. The game would turn from a competetive sport to something like Tic-Tac-Toe. The future generations won't be able to learn from the valuable life lessons learnt from the game. And also it won't be fun anymore. 

Avatar of tygxc

@7811

"you need to prove it leads to a draw or not, your explanation doesnt do that"
++ Maybe an example makes it clear.
Look at this game
https://www.iccf.com/game?id=1164344 
From statistics this is >99% certain to be a perfect game with optimal play from both sides.
It starts from the initial position and ends in a 7-men endgame table base draw.
That means all 56 black moves are justified in retrospect as fit to achieve the game-theoretical value of the draw.
To weakly solve Chess, we need to explore alternatives for the 57 white moves. If all of these alternative lead to a 7-men endgame table base draw or a prior 3-fol repetition as well, then Chess is weakly solved.

Avatar of MEGACHE3SE

"https://www.iccf.com/game?id=1164344 
From statistics this is >99% certain to be a perfect game with optimal play from both sides"

no it isnt.  thats using an imperfect evaluator, and >99% is not 100%.  thats how math works.

Avatar of MEGACHE3SE
Im still waiting for absolute proof that black doesnt win with perfect play.
Avatar of tygxc

@7813

"10^29241?" ++ Yes: https://wismuth.com/chess/longest-game.html 

"It is solved for a 7-piece endgame but not the entire game." ++ Correct.

"You can't determine if a move suggest by Stockfish in a complex middle game truly the 'best' possible." ++ Yes, we can. For a black move: if it ends up with a 7-men endgame table base draw, then it is justified in retrospect. For white all reasonable alternatives need to be explored.

"The game would turn from a competetive sport to something like Tic-Tac-Toe"
++ Yes, that is the case for Checkers, Nine Men's Morris, Connect Four, Losing Chess...

Avatar of rishabh11great

How do you know that the moves made before the 7-piece endgame were perfect?

Avatar of MEGACHE3SE

by the way, if you do somehow manage to successfully prove that black doesnt win with perfect play by white, you will be the first person in the world to do so.

Avatar of MEGACHE3SE
rishabh11great wrote:

How do you know that the moves made before the 7-piece endgame were perfect?

he doesnt.  thats one of his errors

Avatar of MEGACHE3SE
rishabh11great wrote:

How do you know that the moves made before the 7-piece endgame were perfect?

i would look at the wikipedia article for solving chess, as well as the proof for solving Chomp.  

Avatar of tygxc

@7815

"thats using an imperfect evaluator, and >99% is not 100%.  thats how math works."
++ That is not an evaluator, the 7-men endgame table base is the perfect evaluator.
The game ends in a 7-men endgame table base draw, so the black moves need not be questioned. The white moves need to be questioned and alternatives explored, as there is a < 1% probability that some better white move is avaible.

Avatar of MEGACHE3SE
rishabh11great wrote:

How do you know that the moves made before the 7-piece endgame were perfect?

I would recommend reading the wikipedia article on solving chess.  tygxc makes a lot of assumptions that would not be accepted in a math proof, so its easier if you just get it from the experts instead of having myself try to repeat the step by step explanation.

Avatar of MEGACHE3SE
tygxc wrote:

@7815

"thats using an imperfect evaluator, and >99% is not 100%.  thats how math works."
++ That is not an evaluator, the 7-men endgame table base is the perfect evaluator.
The game ends in a 7-men endgame table base draw, so the black moves need not be questioned. The white moves need to be questioned and alternatives explored, as there is a < 1% probability that some better white move is avaible.

you need to prove that the game ends in a 7 men table base draw

prove it

This forum topic has been locked