Author: Dave Gomboc
Date: 16:15:59 05/22/00
Go up one level in this thread
On May 22, 2000 at 09:44:38, Robert Hyatt wrote: >Again I agree. But I believe our definitions of "enough" are way different. >IE I know a person that tried to have crafty solve "wild 7". This is a king >and three pawns vs king and three pawns ending with a well-known way to force >a win by white. White has pawns at a2/b2/c2, black has pawns at f7/g7/h7. >White's king is at d1. Black's king is at e8. White to play and win. He >played thousands of games. learning by "position" as crafty does it, is hurt >by something known as "a local maxima" which stifles learning beyond that >point. This position is way easier to solve than the DB position, yet it seems >impervious to learning approaches. Ande search. Yet it is so easy for a human, >once he understands the idea. (Hint: it is all about zugzwang). The "wild 7" position is not impervious to search, given appropriate evaluation terms. Murray Cambell's Ph.D. thesis documents his program solving a similar, if not identical, position, and many other, even more difficult king and pawn endings. Dave
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.