Author: Ratko V Tomic
Date: 20:51:09 10/15/00
Go up one level in this thread
> Speculation is one thing. Accuracy is another. There _is_ a > middle ground... Are you saying Crafty isn't speculating when it attaches the value to a leaf node? Anything but the table base (or a forced checkmate) is a speculation. And nobody quite knows how much free space (due to the inherent speculative nature of the truncated minimax) you have in any particular position. If the Gambit Tiger has different judgment of the amount of this freedom than Crafty, they're both a priori equal judgments. There is no theory or model which can quantify in advance how much freedom you have here. At present only the game results can tell you which judgment is better. Your comment makes it sound that just because Crafty sticks closer to the inherently inaccurate truncated minimax, that this makes it closer to the objectively better moves. The middle ground you're talking is in reality not between an "accurate" and a "speculative" method but merely between two different speculations (or faiths). Otherwise, why would you need to move away from the "accurate" toward the "middle ground" with the "speculative" at all? Why not stick with the "accurate" if indeed it is what its label advertizes. Clearly, you are well aware that it isn't quite what it sounds, otherwise you wouldn't mention the existence of the proper middle ground.
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.