Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: bean counters

Author: Bob Durrett

Date: 07:28:47 11/16/00

Go up one level in this thread


On November 16, 2000 at 09:07:23, walter irvin wrote:

>to me programs fall into 2 list bean counters and knowledge based .
>bean counters
>fritz
>junior
>nimzo
>lg2000a
>
>knowledge based
>shredder
>hiarcs
>rebel
>tiger
>diep
>crafty
>king
>
>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 .

If one assumes that about half of the total computation time is used for
position evaluation in the "knowledge based" programs, then what percentage
would make sense for "bean counter" programs?

Isn't the real difference between "knowledge based" and "bean counter" programs
just the percentage of total time used for position evaluation?  High
percentage, like 50%, would be "knowledge based" and low percentage would be
"bean counter"?  [percentage of time would be an average over an entire game or
over several different types of games]

Perhaps "average depth of search in a given amount of time" could also be used
as a criteria for deciding on how to classify a program, "knowledge based"
versus "bean counter."



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.