| ▲ | LogicalRisk an hour ago | |||||||
Here's a game from a month ago where Stockfish loses to Lc0, played during the TCEC Cup. https://lichess.org/S9AwOvWn Chess is a 2 player game of perfect, finite information, so by Zermelo's theorem either one side always wins with optimal play or it's a draw with optimal play. The argument from the Discord person simply says that Stockfish computationally can't come up with a way to beat itself. Whether this is true (and it really sounds like a question about depth in search) is separate from whether the game itself is solved, and it very much is not. Solving chess would be a table that simply lists out the optimal strategy at every node in the game tree. Since this is computationally infeasible, we will certainly never solve chess absent some as yet unknown advance in computation. | ||||||||
| ▲ | RivieraKid an hour ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||
What I meant by "solved" is "never loses from the starting position against Stockfish that has infinite time per move". In the TCEC game, I see "2. f4?!", so I'm guessing Stockfish was forced to played some specific opening, i.e. it was forced to make a mistake. | ||||||||
| ||||||||
| ▲ | sscg13 an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||
Surely it is apparent to you that the first few moves are not independently chosen by the engine, but rather intentionally chosen by the TCEC bookmakers to create a position on the edge between a draw and a decisive result. For what it's worth, Stockfish wins the rematch also. https://tcec-chess.com/#game=13&round=fl&season=cup16 | ||||||||
| ||||||||