Author: Uri Blass
Date: 10:43:39 01/31/04
Go up one level in this thread
On January 31, 2004 at 13:03:12, Tord Romstad wrote: >On January 31, 2004 at 12:38:36, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>Just for fun you might check my evaluation code. I have specific code for KRP >>vs KR that helps. It doesn't play perfectly, but it generally wins what is >>winnable... And most importantly it is simple. :) > >I agree. I also wrote a special KRPKR evaluation function recently, and it has >turned out >to be useful surprisingly often. It is probably useful even more often than I >notice, because >there are probably often important variations with this endgame even in games >where the >endgame never appears on the board. > >As you say, writing a reasonably good KRPKR eval isn't all that hard. It's a >good idea to >write some code for this endgame even if you always plan to use the full 5-piece >tablebases, because it enables you to see wins or draws several plies earlier. >Tablebases >are great, but they shouldn't be used as a replacement for endgame knowledge in >the >evaluation function. > >Tord Note that evaluation that is good enough to win KRP vs KR does not have to be good enough to detect draws and if it only good enough to give wins better score than draws and simpler win better score than harder win then it is good enough when you already have the endgame but not always good enough before it. Uri
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.