Author: Kurt Utzinger
Date: 14:41:00 03/26/03
Go up one level in this thread
On March 26, 2003 at 17:29:57, Peter Berger wrote:
>On March 26, 2003 at 16:37:59, Kurt Utzinger wrote:
>
>>On March 26, 2003 at 16:22:47, Peter Berger wrote:
>>
>>>On March 26, 2003 at 15:27:39, Kurt Utzinger wrote:
>>>
>>>>On March 26, 2003 at 06:28:52, Peter Berger wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>These can be tough or very easy depending on engine - some engines seem to know
>>>>>too much here. They are also interesting for humans I think.
>>>>>
>>>>>6k1/p4p2/6p1/1P2p2p/4q2P/4Q1P1/P4P2/6K1 b - - 0 1
>>>>>
>>>>>1..Qxe3! wins for black.
>>>>
>>>> Hi Peter
>>>> Do you really think that in these positons it is a matter of knowledge
>>>> for chess programs?
>>>
>>>Yes, I do - see below.
>>>
>>>
>>>I doubt and assume it's simply a matter of search and
>>>> calculation.
>>>
>>>This depends on the time availlable. You not only want to solve it, but you want
>>>to solve it fast enough.
>>>
>>>
>>>>We can see this from analysis with Rebel 12 Beta1. In the first
>>>> position it's easy to see for the program that white will lose a pawn. In
>>>> the second position, Rebel needs 9m2s to come to a slightly negative
>>>> evaluation for ... Qxe3?
>>>
>>>See?
>>
>> Hi Peter
>> Sorry, I forgot to post the analysis of Rebel 12 Beta2 for the first
>> position where the program sees an win within some seconds only. This
>> made me think that it's not a question of chess knowledge.
>> Kurt
>
>Hi Kurt,
>
>my opinion: the knowledge to be good at position 2 which is too deep to find by
>search hurts performance in position 1. Programs that give huge scores for
>outside passers will have problems to get number 1 fast( Rebel doesn't) but will
>solve number 2 without problems.
>
>I hope I made my point a little clearer.
>
>Kind regards,
>Peter
Hi Peter
It would be interesting to hear the programmer's view.
Kurt
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.