Author: KarinsDad
Date: 14:36:05 06/11/99
Go up one level in this thread
On June 11, 1999 at 17:23:34, Dann Corbit wrote: >On June 11, 1999 at 17:08:33, KarinsDad wrote: >[snip] >>Yes, but how do you get the human to walk towards these obscure positions? >They may be obscure, but they are not all that rare. I would simply do a >database search for nearby positions which have a huge+ change in eval going >from 10 to 13 plies. There are quite a lot of them. When I find one nearby, I >might try to aim towards it. > >>Seems it would be less effort and more results to just play the best move found >>at all times. Or, to realize that you are playing a human and change the >>evaluation to increase the sacrifice value (for the computer's side). >Don't know till we try. It might not be all that difficult. I can prescan the >database and give these special positions a "human-fooler" tag of some kind. >Then when I inquire of my dataset, I can look at the moves I have requested in >my inquiry. If I have a move that is nearly as good as the "best" one but has a >human-fooler bonus, I could alter my play depending upon whether I am playing a >human or a computer. A possibility to be sure. But, if there are a lot of these positions, I would not want my program to be searching a database instead of the current tree. Sounds time consuming (of course, we will not know unless we try). I think it might be easier to have the search engine do this for you. If it finds a sacrifice, it could search it a little deeper to see if it is a promising sacrifice. If so, it could decide that the difference between the PV and the sacrifice is below it's "playing a human" sacrifice threshold and it could make the decision to make the sacrifice. KarinsDad :)
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.