Author: Johan de Koning
Date: 03:27:49 08/17/03
Go up one level in this thread
On August 16, 2003 at 15:24:17, John Merlino wrote: >On August 16, 2003 at 15:21:26, Robin Smith wrote: > >>Johan, I have analysed with all the top engines. The ones that clear hash tables >>are FAR worse for interactive analysis. Believe me. >>Robin > >That may be true, but Johan has said that the primary use of his engine (tool) >is to PLAY a game chess, not analyze it, and he has designed his engine (tool) >with that primary purpose in mind. I may have not been perfectly clear, but my intention was to depict an engine as a tool that "does" a position and nothing more nothing less. As such it can be empoyed for a variety of appications: playing games, running test positions, overnight analysis, interactive analysis, advice, blunder check, statistical research on GM games, hardware benchmarking, and insert_your_plan_here. Back to Robin: Most of the applications require extra paramaters. Obviously time control is needed to play a game. Personality settings are useful to play a different game. Critical positions-and-values could greatly enhance interactive analyis, if implemented as a user controlled "learning file". And that's where I'm back to my point: TTs do enhance analysis, but they're unreliable. After playing back 1 move you you will immediately have a 13 ply score on your screen, but without a PV and without 12, 11, ... ply scores. After playing several moves back and forth you'll just have to wait and see what you get. It can be done better and it will be done better. Until then, please enjoy what you have right now. I think you do. :-) ... Johan
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.