Author: Chris Carson
Date: 06:46:58 07/29/99
Go up one level in this thread
On July 29, 1999 at 09:29:32, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On July 29, 1999 at 08:25:58, Chris Carson wrote: > >>On July 29, 1999 at 07:16:32, Amir Ban wrote: >> >>>On July 28, 1999 at 18:16:24, Dann Corbit wrote: >>> >>>>On July 28, 1999 at 17:50:51, Kristo Miettinen wrote: >>>> >>>>>The position is the opening array, all pieces in their initial positions. The >>>>>explanation about the eight pawns makes sense, intending to steer Crafty into >>>>>open waters (on the assumption that the opponent is human?) >>>>> >>>>>I was looking into this on a whim, as I use the advantage of White in the >>>>>opening position as my quantum of positional value (on which scale the value of >>>>>a pawn is 6 quanta for me). >>>>Here is the C.A.P. record for that position. >>>> >>>>rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - acd 15; ce -7; pv e4 e6 Nf3 >>>>Bb4 Nc3 Ne7 Bc4 Nbc6 O-O O-O d4 Bxc3 bxc3 Na5 Bb5; pm e4; id "C.A.P. 4028"; >>>> >>>>I bet you never knew crafty was French. >>>> >>>>Crafty thinks it is behind by 7 one hundredths of a pawn. This is obviously >>>>conservative because white has a tempo at least. But I don't think that it is >>>>grossly inaccurate. >>> >>>A correct evaluation is one that matches the winning percentages of the >>>position. I think white has about 54% in serious play, and if so the evaluation >>>should be about +0.20. >>> >>>Amir >> >>Amir, >> >>Interesting point. If I read you correctly, the "Evaluation" should match >>the winning changes. This is not the way most programs "Evaluate" a position. >>Granted that a higher "Eval" by a program should mean a higher "Chance" to >>win, it is normally not a "Percentage" based on results. >> >>I have thought that this might be a better method of "Evaluation", some >>programs do use a "Percentage" (Crafty) for opening book moves, but not >>for middle game or end game positions. >> >>Any thoughts on how to incorporate "Percentage" into the "Evaluate" function >>of a program (knowledge)? Perhaps a "Percentage" "Evaluation" for positions >>and endgames as a part of the learning (Crafty might be able to do this) >>would be useful. Any comments? >> >>Best Regards, >>Chris Carson > > >I disagree. Evaluations are not 'absolute' any more than FIDE Elo ratings are >absolute. The correct evaluation is the one that lets you _win_ 54% (or better) >of the games from the opening position. Whether the starting score is +1.00 or >-1.00 is immaterial so long as you choose the best move(s) by using those >scores... I agree with you, this makes the evaluation relative to the program/version that is doing the evaluation, thus a +0.3 may have a different meaning for program x than for program y, but is irrelevant as long as the best move is choosen by the program using the score. Best Regards, Chris Carson
This page took 0.01 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.