Author: stuart taylor
Date: 15:08:21 05/01/00
Go up one level in this thread
On May 01, 2000 at 05:18:13, Jeroen van Dorp wrote: >I should know better by now, but I didn't pay enough attention and now I don't >know. > >I've seen Nunn tests, tournaments, all kind of kinky positions (supposed to be) >unsolvable for chess programs. > >Are all these things really important to programmers? > >I stopped playing engine vs engine tournaments like that because I see no reason >for them other than checking some of my own opening variations or chess ideas - >to be tested by a few programs, for my self, without any meaning for others here >around. > >But how about you programmers? If you would like feedback on your engines, >should the non-programming lot of us test, and if yes, what and how? >What information from actual chess playing (be it test suites or complete games, >or analysis) do you use to pick out the flaws in your engine? > >Do you have any help from the info a lot of people offer on this message board? > >I'm very curious, as some of these procedures may help even me to beat chess >programs easier or take advantage of weaknesses. >Not that this is possible of course, as mediocre players like me.... well, been >there, done that :)) > >Jeroen ;-} good that someone asks this, as I don't think that any of the practicing programmers made even one comment about my question/thought on programming by getting the program to constantly shuffle round the peices to ideal-possible future positions and move according to that goal-if applicable according to much analysis and many criteria. OK, maybe it's a daft idea, but it must have been so daft that it isn't even worth trying to consider. Or perhaps it's so obvious that every programmer thought about it only as a baby. I, at any rate still don't know. S.Taylor
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.