Author: Russell Reagan
Date: 22:19:53 03/10/05
Go up one level in this thread
On March 10, 2005 at 11:39:06, Anthony Cozzie wrote: >I am not so sure. I think Junior, Shredder, and Fritz all do well based upon >evaluation, not search. > >anthony I'm not so sure it's one or the other. Search produces knowledge, knowledge guides the search, and round and round we go. They aren't independent parts. They're connected and they rely on each other. Assuming an engine is doing theoretically unsound things like reductions, forward pruning, and using hash tables the way they are typically used, even one slight change can produce drastic effects (good and bad, usually bad). Pretend Shredder has the best search and Junior has the best evaluation. I would argue that if you created a program with Shredder's search and Junior's evaluation, that the resulting program would be weaker than both Shredder and Junior.
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.