How long it will take a Super Computer to solve chess?

[rlsuth]

Someone needs to write a program that runs like SETI@HOME. If enough people download the program and let their PC's stay running, we'd have the biggest computer in the world and a lot of questions would be solved.

[S.Taylor]

Solving chess means finding an optimal strategy for playing chess, i.e. one by which one of the players (White or Black) can always force a victory, or both can force a draw.

Recent scientific advances have not significantly changed that assessment. The game of checkers was solved in 2007,[5] but it has roughly the square root of the number of positions in chess. Jonathan Schaeffer, the scientist who led the effort, said a breakthrough such as quantum computing would be needed before solving chess could even be attempted, but he does not rule out the possibility, saying that the one thing he learned from his 16-year effort of solving checkers "is to never underestimate the advances in technology".[6] Assuming computational power continues to increase exponentially, chess would be solved "before 2250".[7]
[edit] Notes

http://rjlipton.wordpress.com/2010/05/1 ... s-one-day/

I would be EXTREMELY interested to see a program with chess solved. However, anything from Houdini 1.5 or stronger, i already decided, is enough for my purposses. I was waiting many years for that level from available chess computers. So i have to be satisfied one day, and i would call that now. I never wanted to ask for too much

I'm talking as a consumer.

But let me suggest a problem which might occur even in a solved-chess program!!!
Please give opinions if this might be true.

A program can may be be made, one day, to draw ANYONE or thing. Such a program will obviously come top in any match, as it will never have any losses, and would surely win one or two vs any program which is not like as great as the "solved chess" monster.
However, that may not mean it plays the strongest moves always. The moves might just be strong enough to hold the draw.... assuming its opponent didn't make big mistakes, in which case it would obviously win (coldly). [but it may not know how to exploit all (exploitable) microscopic mistakes and innacuracies].

If it will not do that, then it's not all that interesting to me, to have chess solved in a program. Another human or program might find a better move!

Well we could make the machine choose its moves based on how many possible losing moves could the opponent make.

So if the only reasonable answer to QXQ is PXQ, then THAT could cause the opponent the most losing moves, too.

[EroSennin]

Solving chess means finding an optimal strategy for playing chess, i.e. one by which one of the players (White or Black) can always force a victory, or both can force a draw.

Recent scientific advances have not significantly changed that assessment. The game of checkers was solved in 2007,[5] but it has roughly the square root of the number of positions in chess. Jonathan Schaeffer, the scientist who led the effort, said a breakthrough such as quantum computing would be needed before solving chess could even be attempted, but he does not rule out the possibility, saying that the one thing he learned from his 16-year effort of solving checkers "is to never underestimate the advances in technology".[6] Assuming computational power continues to increase exponentially, chess would be solved "before 2250".[7]
[edit] Notes

http://rjlipton.wordpress.com/2010/05/1 ... s-one-day/

I would be EXTREMELY interested to see a program with chess solved. However, anything from Houdini 1.5 or stronger, i already decided, is enough for my purposses. I was waiting many years for that level from available chess computers. So i have to be satisfied one day, and i would call that now. I never wanted to ask for too much

I'm talking as a consumer.

But let me suggest a problem which might occur even in a solved-chess program!!!
Please give opinions if this might be true.

A program can may be be made, one day, to draw ANYONE or thing. Such a program will obviously come top in any match, as it will never have any losses, and would surely win one or two vs any program which is not like as great as the "solved chess" monster.
However, that may not mean it plays the strongest moves always. The moves might just be strong enough to hold the draw.... assuming its opponent didn't make big mistakes, in which case it would obviously win (coldly). [but it may not know how to exploit all (exploitable) microscopic mistakes and innacuracies].

If it will not do that, then it's not all that interesting to me, to have chess solved in a program. Another human or program might find a better move!

Well we could make the machine choose its moves based on how many possible losing moves could the opponent make.

So if the only reasonable answer to QXQ is PXQ, then THAT could cause the opponent the most losing moves, too.

Well obiously we could also make it a little more difficult.