Author: Chessfun
Date: 07:05:31 11/16/00
Go up one level in this thread
On November 16, 2000 at 09:47:57, Jari Huikari wrote: >On November 16, 2000 at 09:07:23, walter irvin wrote: > >>now you would think that the knowledge based programs would destroy bean >>counters .but that is usually not the case .bean counters are some of the best >>and strongest .which makes me wonder if trying to put so much knowledge in a >>program really makes it better .i think that depth of search would count for >>more than knowledge . > >In fact the programs can't be divided into the two classes: knowledge based >and bean counters. Every program is bean counter with more or less knowledge. > >Chess is very complicated game and knowledge that is put to a program may >have holes. It's hard to take into account every kind of cases that may occur >in a game. > >I believe programs using more knowledge will be better in long sight. Thought >they now may loose to deeper searching program with less knowledge. > > Jari I think the bean counters and/or knowledge based is the same as the old/new paradigm. At least by Thorsten's definition. Trouble is based again on Thorsten's definition some of the programs were put in the wrong class. Sarah.
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.