Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: What Gambit New Paradigm could be...if it exist

Author: Ratko V Tomic

Date: 08:07:55 10/23/00

Go up one level in this thread


> GT has larger-than-life king safety scores.  That
> is all.  No different search paradigm or anything else.

There are several end-user easily tunable programs. Programmer's
have also been tuning their evaluation functions for ages. Had
it been just matter of improving strength by increasing king safety
scores, most programs would be playing in that style already.

To get GT's performance, there must be some additional ingredient that
other programmer's have missed. Since Christophe was talking about plans
to unify GT with regular Tiger, it has to be some extra work done and
spread out (so it can't be trivially transplanted into the regular
Tiger) within the lower level search code which helps it discover and
judge attacking chances better than other programs.

Or perhaps that in combination with some new more elaborate king-attack
oriented post-processing evaluator (using the above mentioned info)
which affects the evaluations and the search in the next iteration.

This would in effect create a feedback loop between the low level search
and the knowledge based post-processor, but unlike conventional leaf
evaluators, where knowledge is applied at the leaves and flows up the
tree toward the root, here it would flow both ways, where the
post-processor for the iteration N would act as a pre-processor for
the iteration N+1. That would be a much more dynamic and sensitive
pre-processor compared to the static pre-processors (which only looks
at the features of the root position).


In any case, however far or close the above conjectures may be, it would
be a difference of at least that size that makes GT play in the risky,
attacking style and still perform exceptionally well against other programs.

The conventional wisdom is that such style, while effective against humans
(such as Rebel's Anti-GM mode), will fail to impress and spook other strong
programs. That conventional wisdom wasn't some arbitrary dictum. It was
the result of many years (and across many different programs) of precisely
the kind of king safety tweaks which you (and Uri) are now offering as
an explanation of the GT's unique combination of a risky style with the
superior comp-comp performance. It doesn't fit.




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.