Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: how programs analyes games (front-back) or (back-front) which is better

Author: Uri Blass

Date: 14:38:58 11/21/00

Go up one level in this thread


On November 21, 2000 at 14:48:25, Robert Hyatt wrote:

>On November 21, 2000 at 14:32:51, ERIQ wrote:
>
>>or is either better ?? your thoughts.
>>
>>I was thinking about buying yet another program for analyses of games.
>>Though I like chess tigers playing ablity I wonder it fritz with it's
>>backward way of doing it and ability to add eval's like (!,!?)automaticaly
>>would be better for just looking at game scores.
>
>
>I don't like back to front.  It requires that stuff from the end of the
>game be back-filled through the hash table.  Here are the two arguments:
>
>1.  back to front is better... because you can use stuff happening at the end
>of the game to influence scores and moves earlier in the game.
>
>2.  front to back is better because it gives a true reflection of what the
>computer would have seen had _it_ been playing that game directly.
>
>I go along with 2.  1 means you see some bad things quicker than if you use
>2.  But it also means that when the critical hash entries get overwritten,
>the scores jump up significantly, which is also misleading.

I think that the way of learning is not optimal for analysis.
When I analyze a position I want an intelligent program to learn from the tree
that I generate in the same way that I can do it.

When I have one forced line there is no problem but my experience is that when
there is a tree of  2 lines of some moves I can get the following behaviour.

1)I analyze line A with a chess program and go back amd the program understand
that line A is not good and prefer line B.

2)I analyze line B with the program for a long time and go back.
The program understand that line B is not good but instead of prefering line C
it prefers again line A because it forgot that line A is not good.

I think that it is better not to forget only the positions in the tree that I
generated with the evaluations of them after search and to forget all the other
stuff.

The tree that I generate is not too big to remember and the problem is that the
programs that I use do not understand that it is the important tree to learn
from it.

Uri



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.