Author: Will Singleton
Date: 22:31:46 12/20/01
Go up one level in this thread
On December 21, 2001 at 00:57:21, Uri Blass wrote: >On December 20, 2001 at 21:14:53, Christophe Theron wrote: > >>On December 20, 2001 at 19:54:48, Thomas Mayer wrote: >> >>>Hi Christophe, >>> >>>> 2) My program as well as other commercial >>>> engines are using search techniques >>>> that have never been published. >>> >>>well, I think that is the main reason why they are stronger (among others, >>>better testing, more time etc.) and will stay stronger... >>> >>>But I think new techniques could be also discovered by Amateurs - not so long >>>ago you was also Amateur - and I am totally sure that you have VERY special >>>search techniques and pruning methods - else I do not understand the depths the >>>Tigers are reaching... It's really amazing to watch... :) >>> >>>>> 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. >>> >>>In my opinion, "correct" prunning is they best way to get stronger and >>>stronger... As you said - nullmove can't be everything... believe me, I am >>>searching, maybe I will find someday something... And I am totally sure all the >>>others are also searching... futility pruning for example is an idea, but I >>>don't use it myself because it don't seems to be a win for my engine... and >>>chess is complicate enough that there could be many many many ..... many more >>>ideas... prunning is always risky, but if you find a good and robust way, it is >>>overall a win... and I believe, YOU have found something and the others for sure >>>also... As long as chess programs evaluate 99,999% totally idiotic positions >>>there is a way to prune something away... The question is: HOW... :) >> >> >> >>It's not that a have a special technique. It's that I have many of small >>techniques, each adding value to the engine. >> >>There is no "big thing" to find I think. But there are many small improvements >>to find. In the end you it makes a big difference. >> >>But there is no miracle. It represents years of work. >> >> >> >> Christophe > >I think that the time is dependent in the programmer and it is possible that a >programmer with more talent can do it in a few months. > >I agree that there are many things to find but I also tend to believe that there >is a big thing to find. > >Uri The big thing to find is faster hardware. One can freeze his current prog, and in a few years it will beat every human on the planet. Will
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.