Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 04:59:09 04/26/00
Go up one level in this thread
On April 26, 2000 at 05:09:26, Graham Laight wrote: >On April 25, 2000 at 18:13:32, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On April 25, 2000 at 08:16:11, Jerry Adams wrote: >> >>> >>> I'm assuming that since there are only a dozen programs currently rated over >>>2400+ that it must be extremely difficult to program a IM/GM level program. >>>Does this effort require Above Average ability in programming? If so Why is it >>>so difficult? Is it just as difficult to becomne a 2400+ programmer as it is to >>>become a Grandmaster? These Questions are asked out of curiosity. I think one >>>tends to appreciate these super programms more when you understand the work >>>which is behind it. >> >> >>You need the following: >> >>persistence. If you give up easily, this isn't the right thing to undertake. >>It takes time, effort, you will make many mistakes and false-starts, and get >>discouraged. >> >>reasonable chess skill. If you don't understand a backward pawn, or a weak >>square complex, or a pawn majority, or whatever, then your program can't >>possibly understand them easily. It might be a symbiotic process, as I am >>sure that my chess skill (at least the positional understanding part) has >>gotten way better over the years. >> >>reasonable programming skill. You don't have to be a 'superstar'. Although >>chess programming might eventually turn you into one, over time. >> >>I think most anybody _can_ do it. But not very many _will_ do it. > >There are many people out there who would like to create their own chess >program, and I believe there's an opportunity for someone to sell a toolkit to >create such a program (just as there's money to be made making car kits, clock >kits, etc). > >I'm talking here, btw, about a kit that makes it quick and easy to make a >program. > >In 1997, I proposed an idea for how this could work: very briefly, I proposed >the creation of a set of components for making an evaluation function from. Then >I proposed a database of chess positions which the user could create themselves. >Then, for each chess position, the user would be able to create an evaluation >function (wha is important to look at varies from position to position). In >play, when evaluating a node, the program would select the position from the >database which most closely matches the current node, and would use the >evaluation function to assess the position. > >Possibly not the perfect way to play the best chess - but conceptually an easy >thing for people to understand! I'm frankly a little disappointed that nobody >has taken up this idea. > >-g The idea is good. The problem with it is the same old "time" issue. I can think of exceptions (Steven Edwards distributed his endgame database code, his "EPD kit", and so forth, which took a lot of time to modify, test and debug) but they are rare. The issue is always "do I want to take what I have done and make it into a box of tinker-toys that can be plugged together or not, on a whim? Or do I want to make my engine stronger?" For most people, the latter question is more important. But a few volunteers could certainly take a couple of freeware programs, and encapsulate the critical functions, so you could pick and choose between bitmaps and 0x88, between different evals, different search strategies, etc...
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.