Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: an example how users - not programmers - use tests

Author: Steve Glanzfeld

Date: 12:56:00 06/20/04

Go up one level in this thread


On June 20, 2004 at 15:34:39, David Dahlem wrote:

>The best way, and only way, in my opinion, to test engine strength is in actual
>game play. The engine that plays "better" moves than the opponent, not
>necessarily the "best" move, will determine engine strength more accurately than
>all test suites ever created.

But not everbody is intereted in the gameplay strength (only).

Some chessplayers might be interested to find the best engines for analysis
rather than for computer vs. computer games. I think, my example above was not
uncommon. - And: In analysis, it is desirable that the engines finds decisive
moves, if existing, as often and as quickly as possible, not just good playable
moves. In analysis, engines have to go for absolute chess truth, not just for
moves sufficient to win "somehow"...

What is the best way to test ANALYSIS QUALITY in your opinion?

(Simply taking the best gameplay engines, can't be the answer obviously, because
the cleverest people have repeatedly explained that results from test positions'
analysis have nothing to do with the real gameplay strength of an engine. So
that can't be the reversed case either :)))

Steve



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.