Author: Bo Persson
Date: 10:13:21 11/20/00
Go up one level in this thread
On November 20, 2000 at 12:14:57, Bob Durrett wrote: >On November 20, 2000 at 11:55:10, Bo Persson wrote: > >>On November 20, 2000 at 11:06:46, Bob Durrett wrote: >> >>>Would it be possible to evaluate a position so well that only one next move >>>would need to be considered? In that case, "selective search" would not involve >>>any selection at all [i.e. nothing to chose between]. The "selection" would be >>>done during the position evaluation. In the limiting case, only ONE line would >>>need to be evaluated, except in the cases when two or more moves were found >>>[during the position evaluation] to be of equal value. >> >>If it was possible, you would have solved chess! :-) >> >>Just let the program run from the start position, and see if it comes up with >>e2-e4 or d2-d4 as the optimum opning. Repeat for 40 plies and you end up in a >>check mate for white (or a draw??). > >You are assuming that one or the other of 1.e4 or 1.d4 is the better move. >Maybe not a valid assumption! Of course we don't know for sure, as the evaluator isn't finished yet. I would be *very* surprised if it was 1.a3 instead. >Incidentally, the position evaluation software may have to declare two or more >moves "equal" if they appear to be reasonably close. How "reasonably" would be >defined in this case would be up to the programmer. >> My point was supposed to be that the current programs already *do* this evaluation, by doing a lot of calculations for each potential move from the position. The calculations are called "search". From a program's point of view (if there ever is such a thing :-), there is really no difference between performing a search and imagining what the search result would be. Programming is all about abstractions anyway. Bo Persson bop@malmo.mail.telia.com
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.