Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Criteria for Good Test Positions = ?

Author: Bob Durrett

Date: 06:08:28 12/09/02

Go up one level in this thread


On December 09, 2002 at 00:11:41, Mike S. wrote:

<snip>
>
>Regards,
>M.Scheidl

<snip>

Thanks, Mike, for the very complete answer.

I am still unclear on one point:

Suppose one wished to verify that a chess engine were able to correctly evaluate
positions in which some positional advantage(s), such as space advantage, were
dominant.

Presumably, this would require not one test position but a suite of test
positions.

Suppose a suite of test positions, each of which contained the positional
features of interest, were used.  Suppose also that the engine came up with the
right answer for each and every position.

Would it really matter why the engine came up with all the right answers?

Maybe it came up with all of its answers "for all the wrong reasons."

But if the engine solves every positional test position that the humans can
throw at it, wouldn't it be safe to say the engine can play positional chess?

Bob D.



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.