Author: Jay Scott
Date: 15:03:23 01/19/04
Go up one level in this thread
On January 18, 2004 at 06:05:06, Tord Romstad wrote:
>formulate some sort of goal, and call the PN search to determine whether this
>goal could be achieved or not.
That is an interesting idea, but how are you going to choose the goals? The
program has to identify the goal ("queen this pawn") and its relation to the
game outcome ("you win"--there should be no exceptions, or else the exceptions
should be identified), and the goal should be tractable to proof-number search,
or the program will waste time on fruitless searches.
That is great if you can do it, but it sounds hard.
Ideas:
Perhaps a small expert system is called for, to choose the goals.
One way to deal with possible exceptions is to use the main game search: PN
search says yes, this vital pawn can be captured, and you end up in this
position if you do it. Is this position really the win that was expected? What
does the main search say? This could get expensive if there are many ways to win
the pawn, and some of them turn out to be bad.
You want to feed as much information as possible over from the PN searches to
the main search. If the PN search can produce definite scores or bounds for
positions it reaches, you want to stuff those into the hash table for the main
search to reuse. That could potentially be a big win.
Multiprocessor would be good: The goals could be farmed out and solved
independently. With a sufficiently large number of processors, identifying the
tractability of each goal becomes less important. You can let many of the
searches time out, as long as some of them pay.
Jay
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.