Mark Henderson, Science Editor of The Times
Enter our Snapshots of Summer photography competition
Try your hand against the supercomputer
It is game over for draughts: scientists have created the ultimate computer player, which can be battled to a draw with a perfect strategy but can never be beaten.
Even the greatest human draughts grandmasters will never be able to compete with Chinook, a computer program developed by Canadian researchers that can sift through every one of the game’s 500 billion billion positions to pick the most advantageous move every time.
The best that a human player — or another computer — can hope for in a match against Chinook is a draw: even a mistake-free game will not end in victory but in stalemate. A single error means the computer will inevitably win.
The program took computer scientists at the University of Alberta in Edmonton 18 years to perfect, and in the final stages of the research an average of 50 powerful computers were used daily with more than 200 running at peak times.
Its success means that the game of draughts — known in North America as checkers — has essentially been solved. Every possible position has now been mapped by Chinook, which has proved mathematically that two players who make no mistakes at all will always cancel each other out.
This discovery, which is published in the journal Science, has come as no surprise to connoisseurs of the game: draughts grandmasters regularly play each other to a draw, and championships are generally decided on a handful of tiny mistakes that turn the occasional contest.
Draughts is by far the most complex game to have been solved by computer in this way, but while progams such as Deep Fritz and Deep Blue have been defeating chess grandmasters for a decade, it will be a long time yet before an infallible chess-playing machine can be developed.
Though the games are played on a similar board, twice as many squares are in play in chess as in draughts, and the greater range of moves that chess pieces can make make it many times more complicated. There are between 10^40 and 10^50 possible positions — that is a one followed by 40 or 50 noughts, compared to a five followed by 20 noughts for draughts.
Even with the most powerful computers available today, it would take thousands if not millions of years to map every possible chess move as Chinook has done for draughts. “Checkers has roughly the square root of the number of positions in chess,” said Jonathan Schaeffer, who led the Chinook team.
“Given the effort required to solve checkers, chess will remain unsolved for a long time, barring the invention of new technology.”
Games similar to draughts are said to date back to 3000BC, and the modern form of the game developed in the 15th and 16th centuries. In the standard version, known as English draughts or American checkers, each player has 12 disc-shaped counters, which move forward diagonally on an eight-by-eight chequered board.
Win a luxury weekend to Newcastle and its neighbour Gateshead, find out more here
Risk, resilience and embracing new technology
Industry sectors news at a glance. Interactive heatmap, video and podcast
Discover the collective power of smart thinking. Submit a solution and be in with a chance to win a Flip MinoHD Camcorder
The inside track on current trends in the charity, not for profit and social enterprise sectors
Everything the Business Traveller needs to know to make a better trip
Make the most of the summer and enter our fabulous photographic competition, you could win a £5000 holiday
Corsica is an island of beauty and contrast, an ideal holiday destination
Enjoy further reading from Travel to Fashion, Business to Sport, discover more
Shortcuts to help you find sections and articles
The clever way to lease a new car is with Car leasing made simple™
2009
42,945
2008
71,450
Car Insurance
Not Specified
MI6
UK-based
£60,000
The Environment Agency
Bristol
Up to £90K
Boots
Midlands
OTE £85k
Credit Protection Association
Nationwide Opportunities
Completely London
Luxury Condo's in Manhattan with NYC views
The best new homes in Wimbledon?
Nationwide
Save up to £1,000 per couple with Elite Vacations at the five-star Constance Lemuria Resort
and do the British Isles this Summer.
Save up to 60% with Oxford Hotels and Inns
Try our inspiring luxury holidays to the Indian Subcontinent and South East Asia.
Great offers available
8 fabulous Canadian cities ...you won’t find cheaper
Contact our advertising team for advertising and sponsorship in Times Online, The Times and The Sunday Times, or place your advertisement.
Times Online Services: Dating | Jobs | Property Search | Used Cars | Holidays | Births, Marriages, Deaths | Subscriptions | E-paper
News International associated websites: Globrix Property Search | Property Finder | Milkround
Copyright 2009 Times Newspapers Ltd.
This service is provided on Times Newspapers' standard Terms and Conditions. Please read our Privacy Policy.To inquire about a licence to reproduce material from Times Online, The Times or The Sunday Times, click here.This website is published by a member of the News International Group. News International Limited, 1 Virginia St, London E98 1XY, is the holding company for the News International group and is registered in England No 81701. VAT number GB 243 8054 69.
And a great hats-off to Bubba, who has the salient vision to realize that spell checkers should be universally implemented now that checkers has been "solved"...
Thanks for your opinion & making the USA look sharp!
My 2 cents: Demonstrating "solutions" to large problems isn't the path forward for AI, it's showing "optimal solutions" for a subset of the whole data. Checkers is wholly unsuitable for the important problems, like navigating a path from A to B where the possibilities are literally infinite. This solution is merely an exercise in refining to get more horsepower, not a better approach. However, the refinements used to solve this problem could be used by someone addressing the more difficult problems of making the "best" (read: optimal) decision with the limited data available, like determining the best path from A to B (literally infinite choices), or determining in a timely manner that the object in front of the camera is a car headed on a collision course.
Gary, Bloomfield, Michigan
"Something of more use to mankind could have been achieved" (Richard Walker, first comment). You can say that about pretty well anything, eh? How about the billions sunk in the invasion of Iraq, Richard? How about the time you spent making that comment -- couldn't you have been saving mankind in that time? Anyway, if you read the article closely it seems evident that they weren't doing this just as a joke. Nor are they likely to have been able to get the necessary grants unless this study had a serious academic purpose.
John FitzGerald, Toronto, Canada
Research like this is valuable precisely because the problems aren't as complex and messy as real-world problems, even though they're still extremely complex. So they've successfully modeled checkers, not a big deal in itself, but who knows, perhaps what they've learned by doing this can be used to approach more complex systems, like human organs perhaps. In time, small advances in research that don't have much value in themselves lead to big advances that have a lot of value. Remember Newton's claim that he saw further than others only because he stood on the shoulders of giants? These researchers aren't giants, but they're helping build something in small ways that could eventually allow someone else to see further than the rest of us. It takes hundreds of thousands of tiny advances in research, both theoretical and applied, to pave the way for mroe significant breakthroughs.
David Willis, Toronto, Canada
Like a machine that could help internet pundits spell correctly?
Bubba, Tucson, AZ
i find it absolutely atrocious that scientists would devote 18 years to sove a GAME. shame on them. there are so many other issues such as the most imminent,GLOBAL WARMING, that could use the help of scientists in combatting this ever delicate issue. grow up.
dr.s.kahlon, toronto,
Canada rules!
stephane, Ottawa, Canada
What a waste of time and energy. I would think that in the same time and with the same use of computer power. Some thing of more use to mankind could have been achived.
Richard Walker, Adrian, Michigan