Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 11:55:17 08/09/00
Go up one level in this thread
On August 09, 2000 at 12:47:01, walter irvin wrote: >why is not more time spent on better learning for programs???? Because nobody has figured out an ideal way to do it yet. Your program finds a good move at 40/2 and salts it away. Two years later, when your hardware is 4x faster, that good move is now a poor move, because the computer may easily find a better one. >while there is a >vast number of legal positions ,the number of positions that a strong program >will encounter is much smaller . I have a little over 100 million positions in my game database. I suspect if I were able to download all the chess games from FICS and ICC it would double or triple that. At 12 minutes per position it represents a significant investment in time to analyze them all. Not saying that is a bad idea, but you'd have to be off your rocker to try it. ;-) >plus just not playing a position when there is a >negative score on that position doesn't really work because :sometimes the bad >move is 5 or 6 moves back, but takes that many moves to be realized .sometimes >the losing move is not easily know .the only way to go is to record winning >positions and delete losing ones Define winning position. If I lose sometime sometime after playing 1. e4 has 1. e4 now become a losing position? >.that way all you are ever left with are the >winning positions that can stand the test of time .why is this not done .instead >a programmer will spend hours trying to fine tune a evaluation that may play >better in some position and woarse in others , at least it plays different >???????? Because while learning is a good idea, it is probably not a great idea. What programs would have learned 10 years ago would be almost completely valueless today. Take a 64 CPU alpha machine and install a SMP crafty on it, and the learning done on a single CPU machine suddenly has become laughable. If there were easy and workable solutions to problems like this, programmers would implement them. There aren't any. Learning (in general) is a pretty good idea and most advanced programs do some learning. But it's not the panacea you think it is. Just a minor suggestion: Judicious use of the shift key, space-bar, and punctuation marks might make your posts a bit more readable. IMO-YMMV
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.