The use of quantum computers opens up new possibilities for solving complex chess problems, such as generating endgame table bases.
The unique properties of quantum computers, such as parallel processing, could potentially revolutionize the way chess positions are analyzed and evaluated.
For more insights into the intersection of quantum computing and chess theory, this pioneer in quantum computing has some useful resources if you're interested.
quantum computer. will it hurt chess theory?
Sort:
Apr 14, 2024
0
#143
They might. I have not seen a single example of someone being specific about this (other than my own amateurish attempt to describe how a quantum computer to generate a tablebase could work - the details have not been critically reviewed by an expert on QC)!
As a chess enthusiast, I can see why the idea of quantum computers might raise some concerns, but I think they'll actually benefit chess theory. Quantum computers have the potential to revolutionize the way we analyze positions and solve complex problems, thanks to their ability to process vast amounts of possibilities simultaneously. If you're interested in learning more about how quantum computing intersects with chess, https://quantumaiplatform.com/ offers some excellent resources. They dive into the details of how quantum principles can be applied to chess analysis, providing fascinating insights into this cutting-edge technology.
Jan 26, 2025
0
#145
MrIndia wrote:
blueemu wrote:
Yurinclez wrote:
... special relativity is wrong. WE WILL SURPASS THE SPEED OF LIGHT!!!!
Special relativity doesn't rule out travelling faster than light. It just rules out the possibility of reaching faster-than-light speeds by accelerating.
Alcubierre's method of FTL travel (for example) does not violate special relativity.
Oh I didn't know this. Where can i learn the basics of relativity? Any sources
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_relativity
Jan 26, 2025
0
#147
TSFSR wrote:
tygxc wrote:
@135
It is possible to run a Python program on commercially available cloud quantum computers.
D-Wave offers Ocean. https://www.dwavesys.com/solutions-and-products/developer/Â
IBM offers Qiskit. https://www.ibm.com/quantumÂ
Google offers Cirq. https://quantumai.google/cirq/google/conceptsIt is possible to translate the open source Stockfish from C++ to Python.
It is thinkable, to use it to generate endgame table bases.
Tromp has demonstrated a 1 to 1 relation between natural numbers 1, 2... N and chess positions.
That means a table base can be simplified to an array of N bits: 0 = draw, 1 = no draw.
Initialise all N bits to 1.
Set the bits of the 7-men endgame table base draws to 0.
Set the bits of the 8-men positions that lead to a 7-men position with bit = 0 also to 0.
Set the bits of the 8-men positions that lead to a 8-men position with bit = 0 also to 0.
This leads to a short 8-men endgame table base.
The bit says draw = 0, or no draw = 1, but it is obvious if a no draw is a win or a loss.
The bit says only draw or no draw and not how,
but that can be derived from exploring the possible moves and seeing if it is 0 or 1.
Most of the processing can be done parallel instead of sequential,
using the unique properties of the quantum computer.
There should be a 2nd array for 0= draw or loss, 1=win, that's only checked when the first array has a "1" in it, no?
Jan 26, 2025
0
#148
magipi wrote:
PaulWoodard wrote:
The potential impact of quantum computers on chess theory is an intriguing topic. The use of quantum computers, such as those offered by D-Wave, IBM, and Google, opens up new possibilities for solving complex chess problems, such as generating endgame table bases.
ChatGPT is unusually short-spoken this time.
I dont think that's from a chatbot, my bruh
#124
1. Quantum computers are much faster than conventional computers, so when a chess engine is translated into a quantum programming language taking advantage of the parallel processing feature, it will be much stronger than the same engine on a conventional computer.
2. Yes chess is affected and declining, so a quantum computing engine will affect it more and make it decline more.
3. Yes, at lower levels it does not matter. People still play Nine Men's Morris, Connect Four, and Checkers though these games are solved.
tygxc perhaps doesn't realise that the decline is a natural but probably temporary thing. Chess is declining in quality because they try to be more tactical than they should be, aping the computers. Magnus has obviously moved on from that. The decline has led to faulty assessments of positions which are led by the idea that "it may look slightly dodgy but tactics will hold it". GMs have become less positional and so the quality of their chess has deteriorated. I think Karpov would have wiped them out in his heyday. Maybe Fischer too. Maybe Bent Larsen and even some going back to 1910, if they had a chance to catch up on theory.