Author: Bruce Moreland
Date: 23:37:44 11/17/00
Go up one level in this thread
On November 17, 2000 at 13:39:36, Uri Blass wrote: >[D]8/ppp5/k5K1/8/7P/8/8/8 w - - 0 1 > >If programs evaluate this position as negative for white at depth 1 then it is >clear that they do not evaluate unstoppable passed pawns > >I do not know about the new version of Junior but the old version of Junior >evaluates this position as negative for white. >It is not important in order to play the position correctly but it may be >important if this position is deep in the search. > >This is only one example. > >You can ask many similiar questions and check the evaluations of programs at >depth 1 to see which program evaluates more things(I assume that there are not a >lot of extensions at depth 1 so programs do not see it by tactics). > >I do not say that programs that evaluate more things know more because it is >also possible to know the right numbers in the evaluation and it is also >possible to know what to evaluate but it is possible to get better evaluation by >evaluating more things. > >If the design decision of the programmer is to evaluate more things then I think >that it is correct to say that he meant to develop a knowledge based program. > >Uri I can make you examples of anything you want: 1) Drawn games where one side has an unstoppable pawn and the other side has one pawn that is easily caught. 2) Won games where one side has two pawns, both of which are stoppable, and the other side has one that is not. And so on. And what you are talking about is just an endgame trick. [D]7k/6p1/6P1/BK6/8/8/8/8 w - - 0 1 Mine knows that this is a draw. What a stupid piece of endgame knowledge this is, but you think my program is a genius now? bruce
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.