Computer Chess Club Archives

Search

Messages

Subject: Re: KB*KP* -> some first promising results

Author: Uri Blass

Date: 13:54:28 02/02/05

Go up one level in this thread

On February 02, 2005 at 16:29:34, Thomas Mayer wrote:

>Hi Uri,
>
>> I think that being good at chess is not a significant advantage.
>
>sure, but that was not what I mean. It's simple: I can not teach the engine
>things I do not know myself. So as long I have no idea what I should implement
>in the eval I can not do it... Do we agree here ? Once ? :)
>
>Greets, Thomas

I can agree about it but I think that strong players also have no idea what to
implement in the evaluation.

The main problem is that things that you know to be productive from your
experience can be counter productive when you test the program(because the
program can evaluate them indirectly by another term or because you have a bug
in your implementation or because they make some pruning less effective and it
is hard to know the exact problem).

Uri

• Re: KB*KP* -> some first promising results Thomas Mayer 03:41:51 02/03/05
  • Re: KB*KP* -> some first promising results Uri Blass 06:10:17 02/03/05
    • Re: KB*KP* -> some first promising results Thomas Mayer 07:12:31 02/03/05
      • Re: KB*KP* -> some first promising results Uri Blass 08:19:23 02/03/05

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.