Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Let's back off for a minute from Rc6

Author: Ratko V Tomic

Date: 22:00:07 10/19/00

Go up one level in this thread


> IE if my program plays Rc6 and I can prove it is correct, I am happy.
> If I can prove it is bad, even though it won the game, I am not happy.
> If I can't prove it either way, I am concerned.  That was the point
> here.  I want my fate in my hands, not resting on whether my
> opponent overlooks something or not.

You are idealizing ability of risk-averse programs. If it were tic-tac-toe
you can prove move is correct. But in chess, just because some hand-put
tangle of evaluation terms gives, say, 0.3 pawns more for move A than
for other moves B, C,... you haven't proven move A is correct. It is
only "correct" within the model game (-tree) your program substitutes
for the full chess tree (where every leaf is win, draw, loss).

And only the final outcomes (and lots of them) can tell you which toy
model of the game simulates the real game best. That is the criteria
not only for some complex positional terms, but for every term, as much so
for Knight = 3 Pawns as for "this particular king attack" = 3 pawns.

There is no rule of the game which lets you "cash in" at will your
Knight for 3 pawns, or the other way around, just as there is no
rule letting you "cash in" some king-attack poise for 3 pawns. Both
figures 3 are pure constructs of the respective models, they're little
wheels in a toy which is trying to simulate the real thing.

So, Crafty is only "correct" or "accurate" in following its model game, while
Gambit Tiger is as "correct" or "accurate" in following its own model game. The
two are two different model games (somewhat similar, well, yes), and neither
model game is the full chess tree (not even close). And whichever one beats the
other more that one has better model of the game, the model overall closer to
the object it models.

From this more abstract perspective your objections to GT's "risk taking" is of
this kind: I see that odd wheel in that toy model, and if I were to put it into
my toy model (or any model I understand or can imagine) it would wobble and slip
so much that my whole toy model would fall apart. Therefore, that is a bad
little wheel, and the whole model which has it can't be very good or solid. The
only thing that really follows is that it's a "bad little wheel" if it were
transplanted into your model game, not necessarily bad for Gambit Tiger's model
game, much less for all other possible model games simulating chess.




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.