Author: Joachim Rang
Date: 10:04:02 08/13/05
Go up one level in this thread
On August 13, 2005 at 12:54:08, Thomas Logan wrote: >On August 13, 2005 at 11:04:06, Joachim Rang wrote: > >>On August 13, 2005 at 10:47:18, Thomas Logan wrote: >>> >>>I think computer chess will experience a leap foward when the evaluation >>>techniques of Fruit are incorporated into other engines >>> >>>Tom >> >>why people think that the evaluation of Fruit is so superior (Uri also believes >>it). I think the evaluation is nothing fancy but not speculative (contrary to >>many commercials which have speculative eval in order to let them find "human" >>sacrifices). >> >>regards Joachim > >I don't know but something has to accout for Fruits playing strength and >comments concerning search bugs in Fruit leads one to discount the idea it's >strength resides in it's search > >Tom Ah well search bugs ;-). Fabien himself mentioned this but when it comes to code quality of his own engine you should believe Fabien as much as Tord (both are very modest of their own engines). There might be some earch bugs but most probably there are evaluation bugs too (no program is without bugs). These bugs however seem not to affect playing strength substantially. I think Fruits eval is as good as his search - both are very clean and well-designed but not outstanding. Outstanding is Fruits playing strength without outstanding features. ;-) regards Joachim
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.