What did he match mean? “I was the last world champion to win a match against a computer,” Kasparov writes in “Deep Thinking.” Outside the chess world, the impact would take a little longer to register. (Since then he’s become a well-known pro-democracy political activist, even running for Russia’s presidency in 2007.) He also brought up concerns over moves from Deep Blue that were effective against him, but made little sense in terms of machine thinking several times throughout the games, Deep Blue had made moves that were probabilistically unsupportable, and seemed to betray a human instinct for understanding Kasparov’s own choices.ĭeep Blue never played another match Kasparov would retire from chess in 2005. “I was in shock, exhausted, and bitter about everything that had happened on and off the board,” Kasparov writes in “Deep Thinking,” recalling the press conference that followed his final loss. ![]() Kasparov expressed his frustration again and again in terms that had to do with the machine’s magic,” The New York Times reported, reflecting on Kasparov’s loss. “The match ended in an atmosphere of hostility and suspicion, and Mr. But in his 1997 re-match with the computer, he won one game, lost two, and drew three. In his recently-released book “Deep Thinking,” he write that he predicted he would win that six-game competition 4-2. According to Wired, the move that threw Kasparov off his game and changed the momentum of the match was not a feature, but a bug.Kasparov first matched up against Deep Blue in 1996. What it may have been, in fact, was a glitch in Deep Blue’s programming: Faced with too many options and no clear preference, the computer chose a move at random. He later said he was again riled by a move the computer made that was so surprising, so un-machine-like, that he was sure the IBM team had cheated. Kasparov, according to NPR, was visibly perturbed - sighing and rubbing his face - before he abruptly stood and walked away, forfeiting the match. Although he easily won the first game, Deep Blue dominated the second. Once again, the psychological toll of facing off against an inscrutable opponent played a key role. The next year, he played against a new and improved Deep Blue and lost the match. So although I think I did see some signs of intelligence, it’s a weird kind, an inefficient, inflexible kind that makes me think I have a few years left.” He boasted, “In the end, that may have been my biggest advantage: I could figure out its priorities and adjust my play. Knowing that it was still basically a calculating machine gave Kasparov his edge back. Later, he discovered the truth: Deep Blue’s calculation speed was so advanced that, unlike other computers Kasparov had battled before, this one could see the material advantage of losing a pawn even if the advantage came many moves later. ![]() I could feel - I could smell - a new kind of intelligence across the table.” “I had played a lot of computers but had never experienced anything like this. “It was a wonderful and extremely human move,” Kasparov noted, and this apparent humanness threw him for a loop. ![]() He later explained, in an essay for TIME, that Deep Blue flummoxed him in that first game by making a move with no immediate material advantage nudging a pawn into a position where it could be easily captured. But after rallying to beat Deep Blue, winning three matches and drawing two after his initial loss, Kasparov wasn’t ready to give up on the human race - or himself.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |