Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 19:57:13 01/17/98
Go up one level in this thread
On January 17, 1998 at 22:39:08, Don Dailey wrote: > >This sounds like a good idea to me. We take 3 programs including >Crafty, >and throw out any problem that all 3 get in less than n seconds. I will >suggest 20 seconds but am open to any value you might choose (as editor >of the set!) Any problem proven to be troublesome (multiple solutions) >is >also chucked. > >I will volunteer to be 1 tester but am not sure my program is good for >this. I use very few extensions and may not solve problems quickly >so Cilkchess may not be appropriate as an "easyness" filter. > >- Don I don't consider Crafty a great "finder" either. I don't spend a lot of time trying to go deep. However, one other issue: I want positions that don't have multiple solutions. And I don't want obtuse positions where you can either win the queen or mate. I want my program to find winning moves. I'd claim that if I win your queen, I'm probably going to win the game just as surely as if I find a mate. I found a few ECM positions that fit that. ie one with a +16 eval but it's wrong. I'm not wanting this to be a deep mate suite, but simply one where there is one obviously best move... your 20 second limit sounds high... although it might be ok... IE that could leave us with a suite that takes a while to run. I ran the entire thing at 20 seconds and got something like 569 right I believe. Plus another 10-15 I'd argue about. But that would eliminate a big chunk. But would leave us with a suite of 300 that would produce a 0 for most programs at times < 20 seconds. Not bad, but 5 hours to run 'em at 60 secs...
This page took 0.01 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 07 Jul 11 08:48:38 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.