Author: Fernando Villegas
Date: 11:40:05 09/29/00
Go up one level in this thread
Hi Bob Well, let me give you a more detailed an idea of what I try to mean. Suppose the program is already in a losing track. From then on what I say is that he should try to put the opponent in the more tricky scenaries, not jus looking for the best thoeretical move to do. How to do it: maximizing the chance of the opponent to blunder. Example. Supose Crafty plays and has two moves and the adversary has three moves in answer for each of those two moves. This, of course, is just an example. Now, supose move A has the following answers: move x, score 5+; move y, score 5,5+ and move z, score 5,9+ Then you have move B with the following possible answers: move x1, with score 6,7+; move y2, with score 5,0+ and move z2, with score 1- Now, in the usual way, Crafty would choose move A, as much even the best opponent move there is just 5,9+, but with move B the opponent has the chance to play x1, with score 6,7+. What I say is that in this field of bad scores, that kind of reasonning has not too much sense as anyway, with 5.0+ or with 6,7+, anyway the program is lost. So the idea of a swindle comes, as in human games: you choose move B because there there is a chance the opponent will mistake and play z2, with score 1-. If this happens when there are many more moves and many more answers for each move, the chance to commit a mistake grow. I hope this is somewhat more clear and I hope, also, I have not discovered the wheel. Worst: a wheel that does not run. Cheers Fernando
This page took 0.01 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.