#Play deep blue chess how to#

Thomas Haigh, an associate professor at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee who has written extensively on the history of computing, said Deep Blue's hardware was a showcase for IBM's engineering at the time the machine combined several custom-made chips with others that were higher-end versions of the PowerPC processors used in personal computers of the day. The hardware to make them wasn't practical in the 1990s, when Deep Blue was built, Campbell said.

The learning happened via neural networks, or programs that operate much like the neurons in a human brain. AlphaGo played many board games against itself and used those patterns to learn optimal strategies. The artificially intelligent computer program called AlphaGo, for example, which beat the world's champion player of the board game Go, also works differently from Deep Blue. Machine learning systems that have been developed in the past two decades also make use of huge amounts of data that simply didn't exist in 1997, when the internet was still in its infancy. Watson proved that it could understand and respond to humans by defeating longtime 'Jeopardy!' champions in 2011. IBM's next intelligent machine, named Watson, for example, works very differently from Deep Blue, operating more like a search engine. Learning machinesР”Р„t the time Deep Blue was built, the field of machine learning hadn't progressed as far as it has now, and much of the computing power wasn't available yet, Campbell said.

#Play deep blue chess how to#

Building a machine that can tackle different tasks, or that can learn how to do new ones, has proved more difficult, he added. IBM scientists spent years constructing Deep Blue, and all it could do was play chess, Campbell said. 'You can look at it the human way, using experience and intuition, or in a more computer-like way.' Those methods complement each other, he said.Р”Р„lthough Deep Blue's win proved that humans could build a machine that's a great chess player, it underscored the complexity and difficulty of building a computer that could handle a board game. 'The more interesting thing we showed was that there's more than one way to look at a complex problem,' Campbell told Live Science.

'Some doubted that a computer would ever play as well as a top human. Joey, you need to open your mind to more than just evidence and logically drawn conclusions.'Good as they are, are quite poor at other kinds of decision making,' said Murray Campbell, a research scientist at IBM Research. Acknowledging that is not in any way being closed minded. The evidence against IBM chheating is overwhelming. This is a case of examining the evidence critically and coming up with a vastly more sensible conclusion than the really silly idea that IBM cheated. Second off, this is not an issue of open minds vs closed minds which is a piece of sophmoric rhetoric. If you think that Columbus or Magellan or Magellan's cabin boy or whoever was the person who discovered spherical Earth, you have just bought into a silly story. This is not a triumph of open minds over closed minds. In fact all over the world as soon as science reared its head, spherical earth showed up (not like it is hard to find when we have spherical planets, spherical moon, spherical sun, a disappearing and curved horizon, basic geometry combined with astronomy, etc, etc). For instance Aristotle knew that the Earth was spherical and thus all educated Greeks did. Spherical earth was one of the first discoveries of science. So this is your backhand way of caalling me a flat-Earther for believing that Kasparov lost fair and square to the computer?Р”Р‡irst off, your history is wrong.