Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 19:28:29 09/19/01
Go up one level in this thread
On September 18, 2001 at 23:38:36, Dave Gomboc wrote: >On September 18, 2001 at 11:34:21, Bruce Moreland wrote: > >>On September 18, 2001 at 02:57:09, Dave Gomboc wrote: >> >>>On September 17, 2001 at 13:06:09, Bruce Moreland wrote: >>> >>>>If you'll recall, that's what caused the altercation I had with that Chessbase >>>>beta-tester "author" who was operating Hiarcs in 1999. He declared my program's >>>>moves "mistakes" when it was losing. It wasn't making mistakes, it was just >>>>trying to avoid particularly bad terminal positions, and if it needed to give up >>>>material at the root in order to do this, it did. >>>> >>>>bruce >>> >>>Did you change this so that if the terminal score is clearly losing that it will >>>play the move that failed-bigtime-low last? This way, either a less tactically >>>aware machine or a human might miss the win. Neither of them are going to miss >>>a win if you just cough up material at the root. Maybe the beta-tester expected >>>that behaviour (or maybe they were just ignorant, who knows?) >>> >>>I thought your Rf7 against Gandalf might have been exactly this sort of move >>>(the one that fails low last) but I didn't sit down and analyze it. >>> >>>Dave >> >>No, I don't have anything like that in there, and I doubt that anyone does. I >>don't know what caused e5 and Rxf7 either. The program went psycho, and I'm >>glad it did. >> >>bruce > >At least a couple of commercials do. > >Dave Berliner claimed to do this in HiTech and he claimed that it saved at least one game vs a human. I don't remember where he explained it, but most likely either in an JICCA issue, or in the "Compers, chess and cognition" book...
This page took 0 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.