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 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.