Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 12:51:33 06/28/00
Go up one level in this thread
On June 28, 2000 at 12:35:30, Bruce Moreland wrote: >On June 28, 2000 at 11:48:46, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>I understand... but _here_ is the real question: In how many similar positions >>will it have the same eval, and it be wrong? I've seen it play brilliantly in >>one game, and then play like a patzer in the next four games. It is nice to >>find positions where a program _really_ seems to get the right idea. But then >>reality sets in, as you find similar (but not similar enough) positions where >>the program comes to the same conclusion as in the brilliant game, but it is >>dead wrong. >> >>This happens way too frequently with computer chess programs, unfortunately, >>mine included. It will play a brilliant endgame against a GM, then come back >>and play a completely insane endgame that no 2000 player would even consider. >> >>I don't like to brand programs as "brilliant" until they handle things most >>of the time, not just some of the time... > >I think it probably understands it. I know that CST does things that are very >speculative in the middlegame, but this may be a null-move killer. Does Crafty >know to play 1. h5 in the following position? > >[D]2R5/4k3/p2Np2p/4P1p1/p5pP/q1P1P1P1/2P5/1K6 w - - > >Mine doesn't. Force the move though, and boom. > >bruce Mine neither. Too many zug positions there..
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.