Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 11:04:41 11/11/00
Go up one level in this thread
On November 10, 2000 at 16:24:11, Mogens Larsen wrote:
>On November 10, 2000 at 14:12:31, Christophe Theron wrote:
>
>>This discussion between you and Uri sounds interesting, and the ideas might be
>>true and useable.
>>
>>However I see a much simpler way to get an already significant improvement by
>>using Chess Tiger 13.0 and Gambit Tiger 1.0 together, and any owner of the Rebel
>>11 CD can do it:
>>
>>The trick is very simple: just decide to use either Chess Tiger or Gambit Tiger
>>depending on which opponent you have to play.
>
>The idea you mention could certainly be fruitful, but I don't like the idea for
>several reasons. It seems like an unesthetic and slightly manipulative approach
>IMHO (no offense intended). Here I happen to agree with Chris. The programs on
>the Rebel CD aren't an unity, but different entities. I think you've stressed
>that point yourself several times.
But from a theorical point of view I could very well tie them together so you
wouldn't be able to distinguish one from the other one.
Programs are flexible entities. Two programs can be merged into what would look
like a single entity, while one program could be viewed as 2 different
entities...
>The objective isn't to get as many ELO points as possible out of your purchase
>as possible, but more of an attempt to create a more complete and hopefully
>stronger program than either GT or Tiger.
It is the same.
More ELO points = stronger
There are customers who want to get as many ELO points as possible of their
purchase, that's why I have given this trick.
> Besides, you might even get a better
>understanding of the value of the chaos element. Its strengths and weaknesses
>and how to compensate for the latter.
Yes. I'll work on this anyway.
>It is worth pursuing IMO because it seems less difficult to implement than a
>purely modular approach as mentioned in another thread. I wonder how close this
>idea is to the triple-brain concept supposedly used by Shredder.
>
>Do you intend to work on both engines in the future or focus your efforts on
>just one of them?
I would like to merge the two into one, stronger, entity.
I would also like to build a polymorphic program which changes its playing style
constantly, seldomly play two games in the same way, and still play very strong.
This would (help to) solve a number of issues that current chess programs do not
really address, like avoiding that the opponent understands your style and set
traps according to this knowledge.
Christophe
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.