Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 11:36:42 11/23/00
Go up one level in this thread
On November 23, 2000 at 12:22:52, Fernando Villegas wrote:
>On November 23, 2000 at 09:48:00, Harald Faber wrote:
>
>>Beta tests will never show up all flaws and bugs a program contains.
>>As well as software is never 100% bug-free.
>>
>>IMO, there are other things to test, more important, than to take a look if the
>>prog can mate with B&N.
>
>Harald:
>What can be more important than to see if a modern program can or cannot mate
>B+N? One more step and you say it does not matter if a chess program cannot
>mate in no way. IMHO, it is one of those basic features you cannot miss. Then,
>is not a matter of asking tester to discover ALL bugs or voids, but at least to
>check some esentials.
>Worse: this is not a bug, but a VOID. Not something running badly, but something
>that does not exist at all.
>I believe the silence of Theron about this issue until now is a kind of
>recognition this is something to be fixed very quick and not something to be
>dispelled just like that..
>Fernando
>Fernando
Chess Tiger 13.0 does not know how to mate with KBN against K.
That's something I know since ages.
If the beta testers had notified me this "problem" during the beta test stage,
it would not have been fixed anyway. Because anyway I already know that, and I
had much more important things to fix first.
Last year, Chess Tiger 12.0 has topped the SSDF list without knowledge of how to
mate with KR or KQ against K.
Surprising?
Actually, given enough time, the search of the program is able to solve the
problem of mating with KR against K. But if you have Chess Tiger 12.0 and try to
set up a KR/K position and give the program very little time to play, you will
see that it will never win.
In Chess Tiger 13.0 and Gambit Tiger 1.0, knowledge has been added to solve
instantly KQ/K and KR/K.
It's not because you, Fernando, have decided that mating with KBN against K is
important that it is really important.
I have watched my program playing hundreds, thousands, of games, and it has
happened maybe 1 or two times in several years.
So adding this knowledge would probably mean a 0.5 elo improvement.
On the other hand, the beta testers have pointed out just before the release of
the product that the evaluation of KBPP against K had some problems.
KBPP/K happens much more often that KBN/K. That's why I work first on KBPP/K.
I could also mention KRP/KR, which I have improved before the release of the
product. And dozens of other examples.
There is nothing "essential" in a chess program. Either everything is essential,
or nothing really is.
But there are priorities. What is essential is that the priorities are treated
in the right order.
I much prefer having a strong program and people laughing at it because it does
not know how to mate with KBN/K than having a weak program that knows how to
solve KBN/K.
Christophe
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.