Andy writes: << [I wrote]:
A.I. QUESTION: Is there a reasonable way, based on Kramnik's play in previous games, to distinguish moves that he conceived solely on his own from ones that are so brilliant that they were probably computer-aided ?
I don't think so. There could be evidence that Kramnik is *not* using computer assistance, if he's making fatal mistakes that a computer would not make. But if Kramnik were using a computer, and he knows there's a chance of getting caught, and he's smart, he won't just do whatever the computer recommends, because that might risk detection. Instead, he could just play his own game except in situations in which he felt that he had a close decision between two alternatives. In such a case, he could let the computer decide which play was better, and make that play. This would result in play indistinguishable to any human from Kramnik's play, that would nonetheless gain an advantage from use of the computer.
Someone as smart as a top chessplayer would realize that even with illicit access to a good chess computer for use during a match, it can't be too obvious, and this alone may explain numerous suboptimal moves Kramnik has made. I don't want to believe he's cheating, but I must admit that even for fairly acute gastronomic distress or an overload of diuretics, 50 bathroom visits per game, if true, is suspicious. Even more so now that he's said he will not continue after today's game (which he lost, leaving the score at Kramnik 3, Topalov 2), because he has been barred from continued use of the players' private rest room, which is unmonitored. Seems to me Kramnik should be going out of his way to demonstrate that he is not using any kind of chess computer or access to one. --Dan