Was Deep Blue cheating ("GM intervention") in 1997 against Kasparov?

Sort:
TheBlunderfulPlayer
Arjun316694 wrote:

Is deep blue a computer? if so, how can a computer cheat?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_Blue_%28chess_computer%29

MikeCrockett

technically, any computer using an opening book or an endgame database could be considered as cheating if played according to human tournament rules. Humans are not permitted to consult outside resources such as opening or endgame books during a game.

Pulpofeira

Take account Deep Blue wasn't like an engine from nowadays, almost two decades have passed. I don't know today, but then the team GM + computer was stronger by far than the computer alone. So you could say it was cheating (or, more properly, the team of programmers was cheating) if there is an human intervention.

CampoReal
MikeCrockett wrote:

technically, any computer using an opening book or an endgame database could be considered as cheating if played according to human tournament rules. Humans are not permitted to consult outside resources such as opening or endgame books during a game.

We humans use our memory just like computers use opening books. You don't analyze your first move as a white and so does not computer. You play your openings and some endgames by memory and only analyze certain moves just like computers do. The only difference is computers have much better memory than we do.

MikeCrockett

actually it is a form of note taking. the computer starts off with an opening book, usually prepared by a GM. If the computer gets into inferior positions and loses a game, they prune out the last branch from their book where a decision was made to follow a specific line. They "learn" not to play into positions that their evaluation functions have proven to be inadequate to handle. It's no different from a human reading a book, taking notes , and consulting those notes during a game. Computer memory does not suffer the "decay" in memory recall that humans have.

RoobieRoo

It could be both, no need to assume that they are mutually exclusive. Deep blue team could have been cheating and Kasparov was noted for being a bad loser.

The_Ghostess_Lola

It's better that DB crushed GK in 1997. Any later and that skrooey brain box would've made it even more embarrassing and abusive. Now they have a neural-driven "Giraffe" that will eat the moves off of the top of candidate branches & trees....moves noone can even reach w/ a ladder....let alone a hellalong neck.