|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 4 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Jun-23-12
 | | scormus: Let us imagine Mr Glennie was in another room, and the only input he received was the moves being bed back to him by some servant. With the knowledge he had at the time, would he be able to determine whether the W move were chosen solely by an algorithm or was there some human intervention? Perhaps this question is rather relevent today, and even more in contexts other than chess ;) |
|
| Jun-23-12 | | GlennOliver: The reproduction of this game on Der Spiegel website - http://www.spiegel.de/static/flash/... - has additional annotations.
It is not certain if these annotations are provided by Turing himself or by a third party at some later point, although the tone is reminiscent of Turing. The German chess piece names there used are -
K = König = King
D = Dame = Queen
T = Turm = Rook
L = Läufer = Bishop
S = Springer = Knight
(for completeness, B = Bauer = Pawn) |
|
Jun-23-12
 | | Willber G: @scormus:
Subtle and clever post! |
|
| Jun-23-12 | | LoveThatJoker: GG by Glennie!
LTJ |
|
| Jun-23-12 | | kevin86: Do you mean that the first "machine" game didn't involve THE TURK? Was white's move a blunder? Sure looked like it. |
|
| Jun-23-12 | | master of defence: Why 29.Qxd6?? White didn´t see Rd8, pinning the queen or what? |
|
| Jun-23-12 | | Chessmensch: Smart Alick. |
|
| Jun-23-12 | | gars: Turing was an acomplished middle and long distance runner and he invented the "round-the-house chess": you make your move, run or jog around the house and if your opponent did not make his move at the time you seat back, then you are entitled to move again. |
|
| Jun-29-12 | | Doctor Aust: The annotations GlennOliver refers to on the Spiegel version of the game are indeed Turing's - they come from the original short article he wrote partly describing his ideas for a chess programme, which is also the source of the game. The article was in a pretty obscure book, but it is reproduced on a page at chessbase where Matthias Feist writes about programming a 'Turing Engine' for Fritz using Turing's position evaluation rules. http://www.chessbase.de/spotlight/s... |
|
| Jun-29-12 | | Doctor Aust: By the way, Gary Kasparov gave a lecture at a Turing Centenary Conference in Manchester (UK) earlier this week, talking about Turing's chess engine, and played a short game against it. There's a video over here: http://www.manchester.ac.uk/aboutus... |
|
| Jul-14-12 | | Doctor Aust: The game between the 're-programmed' Turochamp engine (playing at 2-ply) and Kasparov is now on chessgames here: Turochamp (Computer) vs Kasparov, 2012 |
|
Nov-19-12
 | | kingscrusher: I have video annotated this game here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CrLb... |
|
Feb-12-15
 | | offramp: 29 moves at half an hour each is 14.5 hours. I used a slide rule to figure that out. |
|
Dec-14-15
 | | moronovich: "The Immitation Game" telling the story of Alan Turing is highly recommended.A very good movie. |
|
| Jan-01-16 | | Gato: You can play the Turing algorithm if you like !
Fritz 5.32 software is free (not further versions).An old software but still working on recent Windows. Turing algorithm was compiled as an engine supported by Fritz.This is a "cool link" :
http://dl.free.fr/vfPX45SNc |
|
Oct-10-16
 | | Sally Simpson: Harry Golembek used to give Alan Turing Queens Odds and win. https://books.google.co.uk/books?id... and
http://www.ecforum.org.uk/viewtopic... |
|
Oct-10-16
 | | MissScarlett: <Alan Turing Queens Odds> Takes one to know one. |
|
| Jul-27-17 | | newzild: <MissScarlett> Ha ha. |
|
| Feb-20-18 | | AlicesKnight: <jahhaj> - see above. It has been announced that Wikispaces will close. If you want the material grab it now ..... |
|
| Feb-24-20 | | Frank Sinapsi: Hi, I think the transcription of this game is wrong: in the original Turing's paper we can read "21.PxB" (P=Pawn) so the intended move was 21.bxc3 (not 21.Bxc3). Last move in the paper was "29... R-R8 mate", i.e. 29... Ra1#.
Here is the correct transcription of the entire game:
1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.d4 Bb4 4.Nf3 d6 5.Bd2 Nc6 6.d5 Nd4
7.h4 Bg4 8.a4 Nxf3+ 9.gxf3 Bh5 10.Bb5+ c6 11.dxc6 O-O 12.cxb7
Rb8 13.Ba6 Qa5 14.Qe2 Nd7 15.Rg1 Nc5 16.Rg5 Bg6 17.Bb5
Nxb7 18.O-O-O Nc5 19.Bc6 Rfc8 20.Bd5 Bxc3 21.bxc3 Qxa4
22.Be3 Qa3+ 23.Kd2 Na4 24.Bxa7 Rb2 25.c4 Qc3+ 26.Kc1 Ra2
27.Bxf7+ Bxf7 28.Rxg7+ Kxg7 29.Be3 Ra1# 0-1 |
|
Feb-24-20
| | MissScarlett: Is the 'original Turing's paper' available to view online? If correct, the source(s) responsible for the present mistaken score need to be determined. |
|
| Feb-24-20 | | Frank Sinapsi: http://www.turingarchive.org/browse...
page 7:
http://www.turingarchive.org/images...
page 8:
http://www.turingarchive.org/images... |
|
Feb-24-20
| | MissScarlett: Hmmm, yes....that does look quite convincing, I suppose. First, we need to find whether our present score is replicated elsewhere. |
|
Feb-24-20
| | MissScarlett: <There is a scan of Turing's Faster-Than-Thought paper on Google Docs. It is the original submission, typed by the author on yellow paper, with ink corrections. Turing quotes the game against Glennie, but deviates on move 21 from the gamescore that was later published in all the reprints. It is to be assumed that he corrected this first version of his manuscript with the moves that have been preserved for posterity.> https://en.chessbase.com/post/recon... What looks like the original edition of <Faster than thought> (ed. B.V. Bowden, London 1953) is online, and, indeed, it has the amended score on pg.293: https://archive.org/details/FasterT... Notice that in Friedel's notes in the Chessbase game player, on 21.Bxc3 he has <In his paper Turing gives the following continuation: 21.bxc3 [...] Qxa4 22.Be3 Qa3+ 23.Kd2 Na4 24.Bxa7 Rb7 25.c4 Qc3+ 26.Kc1 Rb2 Typed notation looks like "R-R7" (which is not a legal move). 27.Bxf7 Bxf7 28.Rxg7+ [...] Kxg7 29.Be3 and Turing gives "R-R8 mate" which doesn't seem to make sense).> As pointed out by <Frank Sinapsi>, Turing actually has <24...Rb2> and <26...Ra2> rendering the subsequent <...Ra1#> the height of good sense. The obvious conclusion to be drawn is that Turing promoted the 'corrected' version as a superior reflection of the program's powers. As to which we should prefer as the correct score...hmmm. |
|
| Apr-24-21 | | Dionysius1: Nice one <Scormus>. Isn't that Turing's own test for artificial intelligence? |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 4 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
Annotations by 
icon.
