Author: leonid
Date: 14:28:07 06/22/00
Go up one level in this thread
On June 22, 2000 at 13:27:03, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >On June 21, 2000 at 21:18:07, leonid wrote: > >>On June 21, 2000 at 19:03:40, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >> >>>On June 21, 2000 at 17:07:06, leonid wrote: >>> >>>>On June 21, 2000 at 13:38:41, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >>>> >>>>>If you think that material-only evaluation programs are good for anything, >>>>>you're sadly mistaken. >>>> >>>> >>>>I said only that material evaluation is evaluation about everything in principe. >>>>About tactics... or just say it. I agree that in actual state of hardware it is >>>>not enough have only material evaluation, but its importance will grow as >>>>rapidly as hardware capacity will improve. Very soon program that have in its >>> >>>Only evaluating material has zero importance. Why would you do it when you can >>>evaluate material AND positional terms with no penalty? Besides, material is >>>just a rule of thumb, just like any positional term. Thinking that you can make >>>a good program by only considering material is absurd, no matter how fast your >>>computer is. >>>-Tom >> >>Do we speak about my program or about general idea? If we speak about my program >>it is not that interesting, since we will talk only about one program in >>particular. When we speak about general idea, yes, material echange can say >>everything. Only through the material echange you can find mate or draw. By the >>same mean you can find all other move in the game, name it positional, tactical >>or otherwise. We can talk how much computer power we need for the best program >>right now to find this or other kind of move, but this is something else. Idea >>is simple - material echange do everything and everywhere. In chess game logic >>is enough to see everything in it from beginning up to the end. > >No, you're not listening. "Material exchange" (why can't you call it >material-only search or something?) is not the only way to find mates or draws. >In fact, you don't need to know a damn thing about material to find mates or >draws. That's my point. As soon as you start evaluating material, why wouldn't >you also evaluate e.g. doubled pawns at the same time? Two times tried to respond on the question of doubled pawns but lost two times my message. I hope now it will work. Evaluation of doubled pawns should be regarded (just as example) as two stage search. First one is pure "material only search". It could be that it will be done deep enough to find that doubled pawns led to the lost of material. Then this move will be never chosen. After the search at certain depth, many moves of equal value will be found. That evaluation goes to the second stage. Second stage. Certain negative value will be added to the move that lead to the doubling of the pawns in order of descourage its execution. If my undestanding is correct, it is this second stage (if generally every program goes after this schema) that is so important. It can take 20%, or even more time for the evaluation of the move in some programs. Leonid. >-Tom
This page took 0.01 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.