Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 10:26:47 10/20/04
Go up one level in this thread
On October 20, 2004 at 12:24:04, Alessandro Scotti wrote: >I'm going to rewrite the evaluation function of my engine and I would like to >know what do you think about dividing the game in stages such as for example >middlegame#1, middlegame#2, ..., endgame#1 and so on. >I've often read that it's better for an engine to avoid "discontinuity" in the >evaluation, which sounds reasonable but on the other hand dividing the game in >stages looks like a big mess and I'm not sure there won't be other side effects >as well... >Therefore I'm considering to implement only the three "classic" stages of >opening, middlegame and endgame, and to provide "ad-hoc" code fragments if >necessary. Would that be enough for decent play? Most evaluation functions will at least take into consideration the stage of the game. Obviously, you do not want to pop your queen out at move 2 unless there is a very compelling reason. And it would be suicide to center your king in the opening. Beowulf has some easy examples. Ernst Heinz has evaluation function pointers that he substitutes during different phases of the game, which is an interesting way to do it. It's in his book.
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.