I wasn’t under the impression that transposition tables were kept between moves, but now that I think about it, they probably are. On the other hand, I’d wager that the reuse isn’t very high, depending on the caching criteria. Maybe around 30%.
Have people been able to learn anything about chess strategy by studying how programs play?
I’m don’t know if they’ve learned anything. Computer style is heavy on tactics. I’m not sure how their strategy is characterized. But it’s notable that most new young grandmasters nowadays rely heavily on chess engines to help them train.
Do program vs. program games make sense to people?
Yes. Only chess engine fans are really too interested in them, though.
It’d be interesting to know if perfect checkers games (checkers has been solved) were amenable to human analysis.
I wasn’t under the impression that transposition tables were kept between moves, but now that I think about it, they probably are. On the other hand, I’d wager that the reuse isn’t very high, depending on the caching criteria. Maybe around 30%.
Have people been able to learn anything about chess strategy by studying how programs play?
I’m don’t know if they’ve learned anything. Computer style is heavy on tactics. I’m not sure how their strategy is characterized. But it’s notable that most new young grandmasters nowadays rely heavily on chess engines to help them train.
Do program vs. program games make sense to people?
Yes. Only chess engine fans are really too interested in them, though.
It’d be interesting to know if perfect checkers games (checkers has been solved) were amenable to human analysis.