Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 20:41:48 07/06/00
Go up one level in this thread
On July 06, 2000 at 23:34:55, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: [snip] >I see CAP as a classical scientific way to waste time on something >which is insignificant compared to the goal you might want to achieve. > >If your goal is only to produce positions with an evaluation of >a chessporgram added then you clearly succeed in that goal. > >If your goal is to do something that's useful for those who want to >create openingsbooks, then i hope i have warned them for the fact that >CAP data is saying nothing in itself. > >A score of +0.8 or -0.8, what does it tell us? It only tells us that >a certain program's summation after minimaxing is this score, it is just >too inaccurate to blindfoldedly go on the score of the program. > >When comparing it to a state of the art hand tailored book where you >have produced a lot of games computer versus computer, then the >CAP data is completely insignificant compared to these computer-computer >data, assuming that data gets also hand interpreted. In the end >only interpretation by an expert can lead to the awaited result. > >The CAP data+statistical information about GM games in itself >cannot be used as a decision criteria if you want to get to a level >where you want to beat hand created books by experts, >wanting to be that it sure eats time making something like that. Another straw man! Who said that CAP data + GM Games will create something better than years of effort by GM players meticulously analyzing openings! What ludicrous nonesense! Draw yourself a circle on the ground. Make it 1 foot in diameter. We will name this circle "6 million CAP positions" Now draw your circle of 3000 analyzed positions in the center of it. It is almost surely better than the CAP answers, but how big is it? Pretty small, eh? What happens when you step out of your teeny-tiny 3000 large circle? Shall we just fall down and start crunching? What if (instead) we have a large database of GM positions and CAP analysis and other data at our disposal. Maybe we can use that information to move quickly and create time pressure for our opponent. Don't trust that idea? How much will it cost you to analyze those 6 million positions by hand? Next year it will be 12 million, and at higher quality. CAP will keep marching forward. Will your hand-tuned book keep up? I doubt it. You will run out of money or energy or both. >It sure is better to have something instead of nothing, but we all >already have something and that something are a lot of books and analyzes. How long will it take you to flawlessly convert those books into Computer readable format? And if you did that, you could still use CAP data (or not) to increase your probablility of making the right choice.
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.