Author: Ed Schröder
Date: 23:59:43 04/02/00
Go up one level in this thread
On April 02, 2000 at 18:41:22, Dave Gomboc wrote: >On April 02, 2000 at 18:24:06, Ed Schröder wrote: > >>On April 02, 2000 at 16:33:24, blass uri wrote: >> >>>On April 02, 2000 at 15:46:54, Dave Gomboc wrote: >>> >>>>It sounds like your tunable policy paid off, in terms of people discovering good >>>>adjusted parameters? >>>> >>>>Dave >>> >>>Chess knowledge=25 is not an idea of me. >>> >>>I suggested to use it only after I read in Ed's site that Ed found that it is an >>>improvement against computers and maybe also an improvement against humans. >>> >>>I found also (after I read that Ed found that knowledge=25 is an improvement) >>>that Rebel(knowledge=0) does not lose in a result of almost 60:0 against >>>Rebel(chess knowledge=500) at 7 plied depth and it convinced me that Rebel knows >>>some important things even with knowledge=0. >>> >>>I think that the numbers of the chess knowledge parameter were misleading and >>>the minimal number should be clearly bigger than 0. >>> >>>I believe that this is the reason that people did not try to reduce the chess >>>knowledge parameter in the Rebel century personality contest. >>> >>>Uri >> >>I also did not expect it either that lowering the Chess Knowledge parameter >>would make Rebel stronger. In my tests I always increased the value of >>the Chess Knowledge parameter. When I did a test with [Chess Knowledge=25] >>(it was just curiosity) I was surprised to see the enormous speed gain of >>the search. Then [Chess Knowledge=25] suddenly had my full attention. >> >>So the improvement was discovered by accident. No real surprise as most >>of the time it goes that way. Chess remains a mystery, it is like a maze >>of 2^64 entries and no exit. >> >>Ed > >That's kind of funny, but I suppose it shouldn't be completely unexpected. If >you try increasing the amount of knowledge, and it performs worse, it makes >sense to try reducing it instead... and there have been other stories of people >removing knowledge from their programs before. > >Dave It is more complicated than that. The higher one set the [Chess Knowledge] parameter the better quality of moves the thing will produce. Just play a 100 games engine-engine match based on a fixed depth time control. The higher you set the [Chess Knowledge] parameter the bigger the victory. So the [Chess Knowledge] parameter works and does the job it is supposed to do. On the other hand a high value of the [Chess Knowledge] parameter is responsible for loss in speed during the search which may lead to a loss of a complete (iteration) ply. And losing an iteration ply seems to be more valuable than the gain of the extra chess knowledge. No doubt this is true for comp-comp but what if the topic is human-comp? Until now I really can't tell. So far I have chosen that [Chess Knowledge=25] is also better against humans. Am I completely sure? No... Ed
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.