Newsgroup: it.hobby.scacchi
Titolo: Un articolo veramente interessante...

Tratto da "The MIT Encyclopedia of Cognitive Sciences" (a cura di Robert A.
Wilson e Frank C. Keil), The MIT Press, Cambridge-Massachusetts, 1999.
Qualcuno potrebbe postare il testo o il link di qualche articolo citato in
bibliografia?
Saluti
Ivo
----------------------------------------------------
"Chess, Psychology of"
Historically, chess has been one of the leading fields in the study of EXPERTISE
(see De Groot and Gobet 1996 and Holding 1985 for reviews). This popularity as a
research domain is explained by the advantages that chess offers for studying
cognitive processes: (i) a well-defined task; (ii) the presence of a
quantitative scale to rank chess players (Elo 1978); and (iii)
cross-fertilization with research on game-playing in computer science and
artificial intelligence. Many of the key chess concepts and mechanisms to be
later developed in cognitive psychology were anticipated by Adriaan De Groot's
book Thought and Choice in Chess (1946/1978). De Groot stressed the role of
selective search, perception, and knowledge in expert chess playing. He also
perfected two techniques that were to be often used in later research: recall of
briefly presented material from the domain of expertise, and use of
thinking-aloud protocols to study problem-solving behavior. His key empirical
findings were that (i) world-class chess grandmasters do not search more, in
number of positions considered and in depth of search, than weaker (but still
expert) players; and (ii) grandmasters and masters can recall and replace
positions (about two dozen pieces) presented for a few seconds almost perfectly,
while weaker players can replace only a half dozen pieces.
De Groot's theoretical ideas, based on Otto Selz's psychology, were not as
influential as his empirical techniques and results. It was only about
twenty-five years later that chess research would produce a theory with a strong
impact on the study of expertise and of cognitive psychology in general. In
their chunking theory, Simon and Chase (1973) stressed the role of perception in
skilled behavior, as did De Groot, but they added a set of elegant mechanisms.
Their key idea was that expertise in chess requires acquiring a large collection
of relatively small chunks (each at most six pieces) denoting typical patterns
of pieces on the chess board. These chunks are accessed through a discrimination
net and act as the conditions of a PRODUCTION SYSTEM: they evoke possible moves
in this situation. In other respects, chess experts do not differ from less
expert players: they have the same limits in memory (a short-term memory of
about seven chunks) and learning rate (about eight seconds are required to learn
a chunk). In chess, as well as in other domains, the chunking theory explains
experts' remarkable memory by their ability to find more and larger chunks, and
explains their selective search by the fact that chunks evoke potentially good
actions. Some aspects of the theory were implemented in a computer program by
Simon and Gilmartin (1973). Simulations with this program gave a good fit to the
behavior of a strong amateur and led to the estimation that expertise requires
the presence of a large number of chunks, approximately between 10,000 and
100,000. A wealth of empirical data was gathered to test the chunking theory in
various domains of expertise. In chess, five directions of research may be
singled out as critical: importance of perception and pattern recognition,
relative role of short-term and long-term memories, evidence for chunks, role of
higher-level knowledge, and size of search. Converging evidence indicates that
perceptual, patternbased cognition is critical in chess expertise. The most
compelling data are that EYE MOVEMENTS during the first few seconds when
examining a new chess position differ between experts and nonmasters (De Groot
and Gobet 1996), and that masters still play at a high level in speed chess
games where they have only five seconds per move on average, or in simultaneous
games where their thinking time is reduced by the presence of several opponents
(Gobet and Simon 1996). Research on MEMORY has led to apparently contradictory
conclusions. On the one hand, several experiments on the effect of interfering
tasks (e.g., Charness 1976) have shown that two of Simon and Chase's (1973)
assumptions-that storage into long-term memory is slow and that chunks are held
in short-term memory-run into problems. This encouraged researchers such as
Cooke et al. (1993) to emphasize the role of higher-level knowledge, already
anticipated by De Groot (1946/1978). On the other hand, empirical evidence for
chunks has also been mounting (e.g., Chi 1978; Gobet and Simon 1996; Saariluoma
1994). Attempts to reconcile low-level and high-level types of encoding have
recently been provided by the long-term WORKING MEMORY (LTWM) theory (Ericsson
and Kintsch 1995) and by the template theory (Gobet and Simon 1996). LTWM
proposes that experts build up both schema-based knowledge and domain-specific
retrieval structures that rapidly encode the important elements of a problem.
The template theory, based on the chunking theory and implemented as a computer
program, proposes that chunks evolve into more complex data structures
(templates), allowing some values to be encoded rapidly. Both theories also
account for aspects of skilled perception and problem solving in chess. Recent
results indicate that stronger players search somewhat more broadly and deeply
than weaker players (Charness 1981; Holding 1985), with an asymptote at high
skill levels. In addition, the space searched remains small (thinking- aloud
protocols indicate that grandmasters typically search no more than one hundred
nodes in fifteen minutes). These results are compatible with a theory based on
pattern recognition: chunks, which evoke moves or sequences of moves, make
search more selective and allow better players to search more deeply. While
productive in its own terms, computer science research on chess (see
GAME-PLAYING SYSTEMS) has had relatively little impact on the psychology of
chess. The main advances have been the development of search techniques, which
have culminated in the construction of DEEP BLUE, the first computer to have
beaten a world champion in a match. More recently, chess has been a popular
domain for testing MACHINE LEARNING techniques. Finally, attempts to use a
production-system architecture (e.g., Wilkins 1980) have met with limited
success in terms of the strength of the programs.
The key findings in chess research-selective search, pattern recognition, and
memory for the domain material- have been shown to generalize to other domains
of expertise. This augurs well for current interests in the field: integration
of low- and high-level aspects of knowledge and unification of chess perception,
memory, and problem-solving theories into a single theoretical framework. 
   - Fernand Gobet
References
Charness, N. (1976). Memory for chess positions: resistance to interference.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory 2: 641-653. 
Charness, N. (1981). Search in chess: age and skill differences. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2: 467-476. 
Chi, M. T. H. (1978). Knowledge structures and memory development. In R. S.
Siegler, Ed., Children's Thinking: What Develops? Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, pp.
73-96. 
Cooke, N. J., R. S. Atlas, D. M. Lane, and R. C. Berger. (1993). Role of
high-level knowledge in memory for chess positions. American Journal of
Psychology 106: 321-351.
de Groot, A. D. (1978). Thought and Choice in Chess. The Hague: Mouton
Publishers.
de Groot, A. D., and F. Gobet. (1996). Perception and memory in chess.
Heuristics of the professional eye. Assen: Van Gorcum.
Elo, A. (1978). The Rating of Chess Players, Past and Present. New York: Arco.
Ericsson, K. A., and W. Kintsch. (1995). Long-term working memory. Psychological
Review 102: 211-245.
Gobet, F., and H. A. Simon. (1996). Templates in chess memory: a mechanism for
recalling several boards. Cognitive Psychology 31: 1-40.
Holding, D. H. (1985). The Psychology of Chess Skill. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Saariluoma, P. (1994). Location coding in chess. The Quarterly Journal of
Experimental Psychology 47A: 607-630.
Simon, H. A., and W. G. Chase. (1973). Skill in chess. American Scientist 61:
393-403.
Simon, H. A., and K. J. Gilmartin. (1973). A simulation of memory for chess
positions. Cognitive Psychology 5: 29-46.
Wilkins, D. (1980). Using patterns and plans in chess. Artificial Intelligence
14: 165-203.
Further Readings
Binet, A. (1966). Mnemonic virtuosity: a study of chess players. Genetic
Psychology Monographs 74: 127-162. (Translated from
the Revue des Deux Mondes (1893) 117: 826-859.)
Calderwood, B., G. A. Klein, and B. W. Crandall. (1988). Time pressure, skill,
and move quality in chess. American Journal of Psychology 101: 481-493.
Charness, N. (1989). Expertise in chess and bridge. In D. Klahr and K. Kotovsky,
Eds., Complex Information Processing: The Impact of Herbert A. Simon. Hillsdale,
NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 183-208.
Chase, W. G., and H. A. Simon. (1973). Perception in chess. Cognitive Psychology
4: 55-81.
Frey, P. W., and P. Adesman. (1976). Recall memory for visually presented chess
positions. Memory and Cognition 4: 541-547.
Freyhoff, H., H. Gruber, and A. Ziegler. (1992). Expertise and hierarchical
knowledge representation in chess. Psychological Research 54: 32-37.
Fürnkranz, J. (1996). Machine learning in computer chess: the next generation.
International Computer Chess Association Journal 19: 147-161.
Gobet, F., and H. A. Simon. (1996a). The roles of recognition processes and
look-ahead search in time-constrained expert problem solving: evidence from
grandmaster level chess. Psychological Science 7: 52-55.
Gobet, F., and H. A. Simon. (1996b). Recall of rapidly presented random chess
positions is a function of skill. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 3: 159-163.
Goldin, S. E. (1978). Effects of orienting tasks on recognition of chess
positions. American Journal of Psychology 91: 659-671.
Hartston, W. R., and P. C. Wason. (1983). The Psychology of Chess. London:
Batsford.
Newell, A., and H. A. Simon. (1972). Human Problem Solving. Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Pitrat, J. (1977). A chess combinations program which uses plans. Artificial
Intelligence 8: 275-321.
Robbins, T. W., E. Anderson, D. R. Barker, A. C. Bradley, C.
Fearnyhough, R. Henson, S. R. Hudson, and A. D. Baddeley. (1995). Working memory
in chess. Memory and Cognition 24: 83-93.
Simon, H. A. (1979). Models of Thought, vol. 1. New Haven: Yale University
Press.
Simon, H. A., and M. Barenfeld. (1969). Information processing analysis of
perceptual processes in problem solving. Psychological Review 76: 473-483.

 bibliografia?
Ma non c'è il copyright, compreso l'articolo che hai riportato?
Alex

bibliografia?
L'interessantissimo articolo di Binet - "Les grandes mémoires,
resumé d'une enquete sur les joueurs d'echecs", Revue des deux
mondes 117 (1893), pp. 826-859 si trova sul sito di "Gallica":
http://gallica.bnf.fr/
Saluti
Ivo



Ceeeeeerrrrrrrto :-)
Saluti
Ivo

 ha scritto:

... a parte gli scherzi, questi articoli rappresentano una parte infinitesimale
delle opere da cui sono tratti... se poi prendi l'accortezza di "tagliare"
dall'articolo qualcosa (ad esempio io ho tagliato alcuni
rimandi non essenziali!), vedrai che non violi la legge sul copyright, ma
contribuisci a diffondere ricerche interessanti sul nostro gioco!
Saluti
Ivo
P.S. Naturalmente alcuni articoli sono di pubblico dominio, come
quello di Binet citato in un altro mio post di questo thread.

 vedrai che non violi la legge sul copyright
Buono a sapersi.
Alex