scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Topic

Promotion (chess)

About: Promotion (chess) is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 26 publications have been published within this topic receiving 419 citations. The topic is also known as: = & Queening.


Papers
More filters
Book
14 May 1984
TL;DR: The heuristic search: An alternative to the alpha-beta minimax procedure and chess thinking: Man versus machine.
Abstract: Ten years of intensive effort on computer chess have produced notable progress. Although the background information and technical details that were written in 1975 for the first edition of this book are still valid in most essential points, hardware and software refinements have had a major impact on the effectiveness of these ideas. The current crop of chess machines are performing at unexpectedly high levels. The approach epitomized by the series of programs developed by David Slate and Larry Atkin at Northwestern in the middle 1970s (i. e., a sophisticated search algorithm using very little chess knowledge) was expected to reach an asymptbtic level of performance no higher than that of a class A player (USCF rating between 1800 and 2000). This perspective was argued quite vigorously by Eliot Hearst in Chapter 8 of the first edition and was held at that time by many chess experts. Subsequent events have clearly demonstrated that the asymptotic performance level for this type of pro gram it at least as high as the master level (USCF rating between 2200 and 2400). Current discussions now focus upon whether the earlier reser vations were wrong in principle or simply underestimated the asymptote. If there is a real barrier which will prevent this type of program from attaining a world championship level of performance, it is not evident from the steady progress which has been observed during the last decade."

138 citations

Book
13 Dec 1996
TL;DR: An enthralling account of the match and of the story that lies behind it: the evolution of chess-playing computers and the development of Deep Blue, where Garry Kasparov believed that chess computing had come of age.
Abstract: In February 1996, a chess-playing computer known as Deep Blue made history by defeating the reigning world chess champion, Gary Kasparov, in a game played under match conditions Kasparov went on to win the six-game match 4-2 and at the end of the match announced that he believed that chess computing had come of age This book provides an enthralling account of the match and of the story that lies behind it: the evolution of chess-playing computers and the development of Deep Blue The story of chess-playing computers goes back a long way and the author provides a whistlestop tour of the highlights of this history As the development comes to its culmination in Philadelphia, we meet the Deep Blue team, Garry Kasparov and each of the historic six games is provided in full with a detailed commentary Chess grandmaster Yasser Seirawan provided a lively commentary throughout the match and here provides a Foreword about the significance of this event

137 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This article found that women in research teams are significantly less likely than men to be credited with authorship, and that the gender gap in attribution is present across most scientific fields and almost all career stages.
Abstract: Abstract There is a well-documented gap between the observed number of works produced by women and by men in science, with clear consequences for the retention and promotion of women 1 . The gap might be a result of productivity differences 2–5 , or it might be owing to women’s contributions not being acknowledged 6,7 . Here we find that at least part of this gap is the result of unacknowledged contributions: women in research teams are significantly less likely than men to be credited with authorship. The findings are consistent across three very different sources of data. Analysis of the first source—large-scale administrative data on research teams, team scientific output and attribution of credit—show that women are significantly less likely to be named on a given article or patent produced by their team relative to their male peers. The gender gap in attribution is present across most scientific fields and almost all career stages. The second source—an extensive survey of authors—similarly shows that women’s scientific contributions are systematically less likely to be recognized. The third source—qualitative responses—suggests that the reason that women are less likely to be credited is because their work is often not known, is not appreciated or is ignored. At least some of the observed gender gap in scientific output may be owing not to differences in scientific contribution, but rather to differences in attribution.

91 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
He-tong Wang1, Shaozhou Qi1, Chao-bo Zhou1, Jing-jie Zhou1, Xiao-yan Huang1 
TL;DR: Wang et al. as mentioned in this paper examined the effect of green credit guidelines on the quality of green innovation in heavily polluting enterprises and showed that the green credit guideline significantly improves the green innovation of enterprises' green innovation.

83 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Wang et al. as discussed by the authors examined the effect of green credit guidelines on the quality of green innovation in heavily polluting enterprises and showed that the green credit guideline significantly improves the green innovation of enterprises.

83 citations


Network Information
Related Topics (5)
Adaptive unconscious
18 papers, 2.4K citations
75% related
Kleos
69 papers, 1.2K citations
75% related
Instrumental convergence
4 papers, 1K citations
74% related
Blind audition
6 papers, 1.2K citations
72% related
Talking animal
6 papers, 1.2K citations
72% related
Performance
Metrics
No. of papers in the topic in previous years
YearPapers
20244
20235,148
202210,658
202161
20207
20191