After Kasparov. Computer Chess - Results and Prospects

    Final article from the cycle about Kasparov’s confrontation with chess machines

    The match with X3D was the last battle of Harry Kimovich with the machine - he never played with computers in public again. However, his rivalry with people also did not last long. For a couple of years he still played in regular tournaments, but in 2005 decided to end his chess career. From now on, chess became just a hobby for him.

    After Kasparov left, there was no obvious leader in chess. For several years, the chess crown was contested by several grandmasters of approximately equal strength. But in 2013, the young Norwegian Magnus Carlsen climbed to the top. Today he is the world champion and the undisputed leader of world chess.

    Meanwhile, the matches of people and cars continued. In 2004-05, two matches of the leading grandmasters against the best chess programs took place in Spain. Both ended in a victory for the car team, with a score of 3½: 8½ and 4: 8. During the second match, the last at the moment, the man’s victory over one of the top programs under the classic conditions of the game, also took place. The honor of such a specific achievement fell to the share of Grandmaster Ruslan Ponomarev, who was able to take advantage of the oversight of the Deep Fritz program 9.

    In the summer of 2005, a match was held in Londonbetween the top ten grandmaster Michael Adams and the Hydra chess machine (pictured left). Traditionally, six games were played. The match ended with the score 0½: 5½ in favor of the machine. All that a man could achieve in the match is one draw.

    And finally, the final chord of the confrontation between people and machines was the match between world champion Vladimir Kramnik and the Deep Fritz 10 chess program at the end of 2006. Again, the victory of the car - 4: 2.

    Despite some hopes of turning the tide, it gradually became clear that the days of the confrontation between man and machine were numbered. As algorithms and hardware improved, the advantage of computers became more and more noticeable. After the defeat of Kramnik, the matches of people with cars - at least in the classic format - ceased. Public interest in them has almost run out. Since then, if it was possible to organize such matches, then only in the "budget" version. The size of the prize pool fell from a few hundred to a couple thousand dollars. Matchesthey were now held with shorter time control, often against not the most powerful chess players. Often, a handicap was given to a person, or a weaker computer stood out to help. From that moment on, chess programs ceased to be rivals for people, and gradually moved into the category of analytical tools.


    In the photo - Vladimir Kramnik plays with the Deep Fritz 10 program.

    Like people, the composition of the strongest programs also gradually changed. At the end of 2005, the “distinguished” old wave champions - Junior, Fritz, Schredder and others replaced the new favorite - the Rybka program. She was far ahead of competitors in all rating lists and for five years no one was able to challenge her superiority. With each new version, it more and more added to the force.

    At the end of 2010, Houdini pushed Rybka to the second role, becoming the new, obvious leader among the programs. Holding on at the very top of the world ranking for about three years, he, in turn, gave way to even stronger competitors. Since 2014 the world's best consideredtwo programs at once - Komodo and Stockfish. Currently, they are part of the analytical arsenal of almost all the leading grandmasters. It is also worth noting that, unlike the commercial Komodo, Stockfish is an open source program. That means everyone can view its code, or even just watch the process of its improvement. Meanwhile, the level of modern programs continues to grow rapidly and the limit of their perfection is not yet visible.

    But back to the issue of confrontation between people and machines. Can the strongest grandmasters beat the best chess programs today?

    As mentioned above, normal matches between people and computers have not been held for a long time, so it can only be judged by indirect signs. First of all, this is of course a rating. Modern programs are already more than 500 points stronger than those that once played with Kasparov and other grandmasters. Moreover, even without taking into account the progress in terms of computer technology. It should be borne in mind that according to the results of many years of testing, the increase in rating of cars is slightly aheadhuman - somewhere in the ratio of 5: 4 or 4: 3. Nevertheless, the margin of safety of modern programs is so great that the best of them now usually without any difficulty beat those programs whose defense was unsuccessfully attempted by hacked chess giants such as Garry Kasparov and Vladimir Kramnik. Playing against the once “honored” Fritz and Juniors, modern programs easily increase even a very slight advantage, and without any problems bring it to victory. In general, through old programs and ratings, a definite conclusion can be made regarding the power of the game of modern machines.


    But, in addition to ratings and program matches, the opinion of the grandmasters themselves is undoubtedly important. At least those of them who are currently constantly playing tournaments or engaged in coaching or analytical work. Today, no serious analysis at the “highest level” can be done without chess programs, and leading chess players (not as programmers of course, but as users) can tell a lot about the behavior of programs:

    Grandmaster Vladimir Tukmakov:
    ... In the communication of the chess player with the machine there was a notorious leader - a person who set the direction of the search, and the program, obediently following the instructions of the leader, only made adjustments and clarifications. But in recent years, this ratio has dramatically and irreversibly changed. Now railway has assumed the role of priest and guide, leaving the protein creature the opportunity to practically use the recommendations of a higher mind.

    Grandmaster Sergey Shipov:
    Programs at the end of the first decade of the new century have become much stronger than people - the best of the best - and this is not in doubt among professionals. Each of us uses the best programs in home analysis, we know them as relatives. Even better ...

    Modern programs (primarily Fish and Houdini) have a surprisingly balanced and humane evaluation function. They are no longer as greedy as the 90s programs. They have a fine sense of initiative, competently work with the pawn structure, take into account all the important strategic factors ...

    In general, decades of hard work by programmers and professional chess players have been well spent. Together they created almost perfect players, far superior to us, living people. It is a fact.

    Grandmaster Sergey Karjakin:
    ... I sometimes fight with the Houdini program and can compare. In a duel against the computer, the feeling of doom does not leave you ...


    Is a man-machine match possible today? What can it be? Let's try to evaluate the options for such a competition.

    Firstly, it should be noted that various kinds of light parties are held today. But for a serious match, you need a solid prize pool, which is hardly possible with a modern public interest. But even if we leave aside financial issues, then in a likely match a person will have to give some head start - in time or in material. Otherwise, he is unlikely to agree to play. Handicap material (of course we are talking about top grandmasters) is likely to result in one or two pawns, or their bargaining chip from other pieces. Unfortunately, the size of the material handicap is apparently not tooaffects the strength of the game the best modern programs. What naturally makes comparison of these programs with people pointless.

    You can, in turn, give odds not on the material, but rather by reducing the time of the machine. But for a modern program to slow down to the level of computers in the first half of the 2000s, it will take you to set it about 1 second per move on a good modern smartphone. This kind of “fit” of the rivals' power, in general, makes the competition between man and machine meaningless. In the best case, we will determine how many handicaps in time it is necessary for the rivals to really equalize in strength. But only.


    What other options are there? The absence of a debut book on a computer will help a person a little , since machines play a lot even without it . From the removal of endgame tables, the gain will be even less . The repetition of moves from previous games is largely excluded, due to the noticeable "randomness" associated with chess programs on multi-core systems. If we give a weak program to help a person, then the question immediately arises of how big is the role of the machine in the results of a person. In general, it is difficult to imagine any obvious and interesting forms of playing with computers today.

    Summing up, we can say that the time of high-profile matches of people and cars is finally a thing of the past. The computer today is not a rival, but an assistant to people. Under the influence of machines, and not only them, modern chess is gradually changing. What this will lead to remains to be seen by you and me.


    See also:
    - An article on the principles of the work of chess programs from Randl
    - The latest edition of the Russian translation of the book “Behind Deep Blue” (pdf + doc): one , two , three links .

    Also popular now: