Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 07:56:03 01/19/06
Go up one level in this thread
On January 19, 2006 at 08:32:33, Vasik Rajlich wrote: >On January 19, 2006 at 03:40:33, Tord Romstad wrote: > >>On January 18, 2006 at 22:19:30, Jay Urbanski wrote: >> >>>On January 18, 2006 at 07:32:07, Vasik Rajlich wrote: >>> >>>>On January 17, 2006 at 21:34:23, Steve Maughan wrote: >>>> >>>>>Vasik, >>>>> >>>>>>I was thinking to have just a "spin" parameter where the tester indicates the >>>>>>opponent's rating. (Or rating difference ..) All engines could in principle >>>>>>expose such a parameter. >>>>> >>>>>Do you know that the UCI specification already has this feature? The >>>>>UCI_Opponent is a standard option that also send the opponents ELO. While it's >>>>>part of the spec I don't know of any GUI that actually sends this info - not >>>>>even the Shredder Classic GUI. >>>>> >>>>>Regards, >>>>> >>>>>Steve >>>> >>>>Steve, >>>> >>>>thanks for the info. In this case, if I implement this feature, it will be >>>>through this command. Testers may need to set it manually (if the GUI doesn't). >>>> >>>>Vas >>> >>> >>>As someone who uses engines mostly on ICS servers, I would love to see this >>>feature implemented. >> >>You could easily implement this yourself by making some small additions >>to PolyGlot, I think. I am fairly sure XBoard already sends the opponent's >>name, rating and title. >> >>>Now if there were only also a way to indicate whether >>>your opponent is human or a (C)omputer :) >> >>There is. Have a look at the UCI specification: >> >>* <id> = UCI_Opponent, type string >>With this command the GUI can send the name, title, elo >>and if the engine is playing a human or computer to the >>engine. >>The format of the string has to be [GM|IM|FM|WGM|WIM|none] [<elo>|none] >>[computer|human] <name> >>Examples: >>"setoption name UCI_Opponent value GM 2800 human Gary Kasparov" >>"setoption name UCI_Opponent value none none computer Shredder" >> >>Tord > >Thanks for the info. For Rybka 1.2, I will use the rating data, but (probably) >not the other data. I'm not really even sure how the human/computer info could >be taken advantage of. I suppose some theoretically drawn endgames could be >given positive evaluations. Anyway it would be pretty hard to get test data. > >Vas I will add that I put this into xboard years ago. Along with code to supply the actual name of the opponent, and his rating along with the program's rating, which I used (still use) to influence draw decisions and the contempt factor.
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.