Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 08:24:51 05/19/00
Go up one level in this thread
On May 19, 2000 at 04:37:53, Stefan Meyer-Kahlen wrote: >On May 19, 2000 at 02:18:17, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>On May 19, 2000 at 02:01:48, Stefan Meyer-Kahlen wrote: >> >>>On May 18, 2000 at 15:24:42, Olaf Jenkner wrote: >>> >>>>> >>>>>It would be interesting to run it in our SQL lab :-) >>>>> >>>>>Eugene >>>> >>>>It would be interesting to write a chess program in SQL even >>>>when it will be very slow. >>>>I wrote a SQL-procedure to solve the N-Queens-Problem. It was a >>>>funny work. >>>> >>>>OJe >>> >>>Good luck and have fun :-) >> >>I think you could actually make a program that plays very interesting chess. >>The reason I say that is if you build a crafty book with 2.3 million chess games >>and don't throw out a single move (yes, I am deranged) it will stay in book for >>an incredibly long time. Basically, all it is doing is a database lookup. You >>could easily do the same thing in SQL. >> >>Some databases like Rdb and DB2 allow foreign stored procedures in C, Fortran, >>or whatever. With a getup like that you might actually create a chess program >>superior to anything else because you could easily and dynamically alter the >>behavior and performance of the book by altering the SQL queries to find moves. >> >>For instance, you might start off with games played by 2600+ super GM's. And if >>you get in trouble, seek any line that still has wins in it. With 120 million >>distinct board positions, you can stay in book sometimes clear to the end. > >I don't think that using such a big book will help you much more compared to a >"normal" book with a couple of selected games (maybe 300.000) stored only to a >certain ply. > >Stefan I think a deep book is suicide. Every move made by a human has a probability of error (being wrong) that is > 0. The deeper the book, the more moves there are. And probability is summed across all the moves in that game. Yes you will stay in book for a very long time. But every time you come out, you realize you are lost because the opponent varies when he finds something that was missed in the game used in the book. I have done this before. I gave up on deep books as a result, unless you have the machine time to invest in searching _every_ move that goes into the book, _very_ deeply... And even then you will overlook even deeper tactics that a human might spot.
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.