Computer programs tournament

[Alex_Moiseyev]

2. Weakly solved means winning every winnable position, not losing from the starting position, and being able to hold a draw from any position that is a draw. This is what Chinook can do.

Stop. we've got a point! It is very possible that Chinook can win any winning position, but this was never proved scientifically.

It's like Last Fermant's Theorem in math: for 358 years since 1637 everyone felt like it was a right statement, but this legendary theorem was finally proved only in 1995. Same situation here with Chinook - "it is obvious, but it is not proved."

The only thing really was proved, that if both sides make all right moves - it is a drawn result. Nothing else was proved scientifically. An arguments like ... "please play with Chinook and see how good it is" not working very well.

BTW. WCC perfect 7 pieces database is awesome!

[megamau]

Edit: I think I see the issue. We have been using slightly different versions of these terms.

Yes, I think we got to the bottom of the issue. Your definition of "weakly solved" actually correspond to mine of "strongly solved".
I don't have a definition of "winning in the least amount of moves" because a win is a win, while you call it "strongly solved".

However, please note that the Schaeffer paper in science uses my definition (actually I copied and pasted from them), so when they claim to have weakly solved they don't mean it can win any win position.

[Ed Trice]

Yes, I think we got to the bottom of the issue. Your definition of "weakly solved" actually correspond to mine of "strongly solved".
I don't have a definition of "winning in the least amount of moves" because a win is a win, while you call it "strongly solved".

However, please note that the Schaeffer paper in science uses my definition (actually I copied and pasted from them), so when they claim to have weakly solved they don't mean it can win any win position.

I have often wondered how they settled on "weakly," "ultra-weakly," etc. The prefixes are nebulous at best.

So if their definition of "strongly solved" does not require announcing the distance-to-win, then what is it called when it can be predicted? "Ultra-strongly solved?"

I will see if I can introduce better nomenclature in the next paper I publish.