Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 10:38:42 11/28/00
Go up one level in this thread
On November 28, 2000 at 13:19:11, Ed Schröder wrote: >On November 28, 2000 at 13:00:02, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>A number of authors have stated in this forum that they use the WAC and other >>test suites to tune their programs. This may or may not make them play better, >>as you know. Consider that the Rebel settings for solving positions and the >>Rebel settings for playing the strongest chess are different. >> >>Therefore, to tune purely to solve test suites is probably not the best way to >>create a strong playing program (though it does produce decent chess). > >Using wellknown test positions to test if your program changes do >a better job is something else than Bob said: > >quote: > > I have seen (a) programs tuned to choose the right move to improve > their test result scores artificially; > >end quote > >Note the word artificially which implies cheating. > >This of course may be the case but then I would like to see it >supported by examples. > >Ed Wasn't it the SSDF that found _one_ case of this? Or was it the CSS readers? I don't remember specifically. But the test was to set up the same position, with colors reversed, and the program then failed miserably to find the right move, yet it did it almost instantly with the original position. Others have tweaked to do better on the Kopec/Bratko test positions. One company used to advertise their results on the outside of the box the thing was sold in.
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.