# Will computers ever solve chess?

That's not what I mean here; Brute force means Stockfish already knows every single possible position that can ever come up in chess.

how do you know ? and are its evaluations faultless ? like myself ?

FACT

i am sure AlphaZero can help with chess being solved!

Total starting positions: 5,040 x 6,561 = 33,067,440

Good luck solving that.

LOL

Computers can analyze over 8 million positions/second .

(we can only analyze up to 5 positions/second)

How does it analyze them?  Is it the correct way, or just a way good enough to compete?

It searches for all the elements that make a position winning (material, seeing moves ahead, position, etc.) in every single position, then it determines the best possible way to get to the best possible position.

Why do you speak in absolutes like every and best?  You know those are exaggerations, at best.

They sound more like flat out lies, created to boast.

When you are actually writing code for an engine it is both scary and laughable when you read what the "experts" have to say about it.

They are facts.

No.  No, they aren't.  They are advertising claims.  Which is odd because Stockfish is supposed to be free.  But I guess someone has to pay the bills to keep the lights on.

Not that I actually read any of this, I just come here occasionally, quick skim then a good laugh.

wars64 wrote:

Total starting positions: 5,040 x 6,561 = 33,067,440

Good luck solving that.

LOL

You can solve each individual opening by name under the ECO codes.

You all talk about alpha whatever quite a lot, but do you understand?

Take a traditional chess engine, lets say stockfish.

It is always minimax, no matter the fancy words: negamax, alpha beta pruning, iterative deepening, whatever.

Now remove opening book.

Now remove endgame tablebases.

Now eliminate the game horizon by playing all training games to completion.

Now eliminate minimax and all associated evaluation functions and use calculus and back propagation instead.

Boom, you just eliminated human error and human assumptions which is why "AI" engines seem to play more natural chess.