Author: Fernando Villegas
Date: 09:47:28 11/13/00
Hi: In a post someone compared the high positive score got by Gambit Tiger playing e5 against Hiarcs 7.32 with the same move played by Crafty -if setted in that position- but with a score of minus .23 or so. Now an issue emerges, I think. What is "best"? How a program measure what is best? Seems to me that maybe there are not only differences due to diferents codes, but even two very different ways - or paradigms some one could say?- to do it: one is trying to ponder each aspect of the position in an objetive way, lastly in terms of how good the position currently is, NOW, when the calculation stop. So an open column is well scored, of course, but not more than what deserves in the current position. The other way could be to stimulate certain behaviour giving to some aspects a clearly greater weight than what they coul deserve IF seen only according to the actual position. In this case an open column could be given a lot greater weight not because is so really good, but just to give the program a reason to chose it and follow a path that the programer dims preferable for knowledge considerations. We can call this prospective scoring intead of clasical, retrospective scoring. Sorry for the words. I cannot resist the temptation to add my voice to the production of new fancy words to this nos so fancy world. Anyway, If my memory serves me well, I believe that iit was precisely what Kittinger did with his Zaphire handheld unit. An analisis by a french writer in the now deceased chess computer magazin "La Puce Echiqueenne" was very clear about that. I remember that, according to the research of this guy, each time Zaphire dims to be best, at once he gives a tremendous score to exchanging everything so to simplify and increase his relative advantage. Maybe is the case of Gambit? Fernando
This page took 0 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.