Author: Sandro Necchi
Date: 03:30:03 02/19/06
Go up one level in this thread
On February 19, 2006 at 05:45:47, Joseph Ciarrochi wrote: >That's cool (using a special book), unless you are interested in the engine's >ability to analyze openings and find novelties...... Yes, but I am doubtful about the engine being able to analyse the openings well and find novelties...why? 1. The search depth of the engines is not enough and will remains so for several years to come too. 2. Some times one need to reach the endgame to see if one move is really strong and that would mean to search like 64/126 and no engines can see so deep. Pls. note also that some lines would be searched a lot less, so a very powerful hardware is needed. 3. Leak of knowledge in the chess engines in all phases of the games...they do not know how and where they are stronger than their competitor when analysing a game/a position while the GMs do and sometimes they chose based on this as well... If you do not believe this than you can try to check an opening with a program and you may see what follows: the program is evaluating move X as good with a + 0.70 score...now if you follow the indications of the program after 5-10 moves you may see the program evaluation -0.70 so that variation was not good as it was evaluated... The program have a limited learning ability and cannot learn as the GMs do and therefore as far as the opening are concerned most of the time the GMs evaluations are correct... Sandro
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.