Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 10:35:46 12/20/01
Go up one level in this thread
On December 20, 2001 at 12:59:13, Scott Gasch wrote:
>Commercial chess engines are, I think, much more heavily tested than typical
>amateur engines. That contributes to their strength. The stronger amateur
>engines like crafty and ferret are, because of the calibre of the authors, very
>rigorously debugged. This is one of the reasons they compete on the same level
>as the pros.
>
>Commercial engines are not using any "unknown" board representations or search
>techniques.
How do you know?
1) I think my board representation is original. I have never found it anywhere
else. It's not 100% original, but what makes it really effective is definitely
something I have never found elsewhere.
2) My program as well as other commercial engines are using search techniques
that have never been published.
>Perhaps some are using forward pruning techniques that are not
>published anywhere. The degree to which this affects their playing strength is
>debatable.
No it's not. It makes commercial programs clearly stronger.
>I'd be surprised if there was another technique like nullmove out
>there but it wouldn't be the first time I was wrong...
There are plenty.
Null move is to chess what MacDonalds is to food. Quick and easy, not too bad,
but definitely not the final say.
Christophe
This page took 0.02 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.