Computer Chess Club Archives




Subject: Re: Branching factor, make me confuse more that ever.

Author: leonid

Date: 05:41:38 04/05/00

Go up one level in this thread

On April 05, 2000 at 05:46:28, Tom Kerrigan wrote:

>On April 05, 2000 at 01:31:38, leonid wrote:
>>On April 05, 2000 at 00:44:28, Tom Kerrigan wrote:
>>>On April 04, 2000 at 23:13:08, leonid wrote:
>>>>WAC, BK, BT2xxx - what it is?
>>>Test suites. WAC is the essential one. You can get that from any number of
>>>places. I suggest searching for them on the web.
>>I do this in even more simple way. I take by "accident" diferent positions for
>>"Chess Life" revue and ask two program solve them. Number of plies to search is
>>the same and both do this by brute force. Time found say me all that I want to
>Is Chess Life a computer chess magazine? You should use test suites that are
>designed for computer programs. I will e-mail you a copy of WAC and you can
>start using that.

Thanks, Tom! Very appreciated.

Actually for testing the positions for mate I created many hundreds of different
positions and put them on the Web to use for verification.

>>>>I can't say nothing about GNU, Crafty and so like since I don't know how to find
>>>>their core logic speed when we speek about "positional move". If you speak about
>>>>finding mate then mine should lead or be between the leading at least.
>>>I'm not talking about speed. The most straightforward way to compare chess
>>>programs is by having them play chess against each other. If you play a game
>>>between your program and Crafty, how well does your program do?
>>I do speak about speed. When positional logic will reach speed that I consider
>>as good enough I will go into the finalizing of my positional logic, more
>>exactly my entire chess program. Only mate solving logic don't ask any
>>additional material when it go into work. It can be compared even now. Comparing
>>my actual chess program, that is not finalized, to some other that is completely
>>done is premature and useless. In positional logic only its basic part can be
>If other chess programs are completely done, why are there so many new versions
>of them?
>If you play your program against other programs, you are comparing two works in
>progress. I see nothing wrong with that.

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.