Author: Djordje Vidanovic
Date: 19:11:39 03/22/01
Go up one level in this thread
On March 22, 2001 at 17:55:02, Albert Silver wrote: >On March 22, 2001 at 05:25:55, Djordje Vidanovic wrote: > >>On March 22, 2001 at 05:23:50, Djordje Vidanovic wrote: >> >>>On March 22, 2001 at 05:22:39, Djordje Vidanovic wrote: >>> >>>>On March 21, 2001 at 18:32:20, Tim Foden wrote: >>>> >>>>>On March 21, 2001 at 16:59:27, Dann Corbit wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>I have always been very impressed with Phalanx. >>>>>> >>>>>>For the same search depth, Phalanx will solve many problems that no other engine >>>>>>will solve at the same depth. That indicates to me that the search extensions >>>>>>involved are very smart. >>>>>> >>>>>>Also, Phalanx will find solutions to problems that other engines simply will not >>>>>>find. I think this is mostly related to king safety, but I am not sure. >>>>>> >>>>>>Phalanx is the little engine that could. >>>>>>;-) >>>>>> >>>>>>Lower NPS (factor of 2 to factor of 4), lower search depths (always 1 or 2 ply >>>>>>behind), and yet he can play with the big boys and give them all that they can >>>>>>handle. Pretty amazing, really. >>>>> >>>>>I have to agree. Phalanx is very impressive. >>>>> >>>>>I have been studying Phalanx's static evaluation function, and it does a lot of >>>>>clever things. I think one of the ones that helps with tactical stuff is that >>>>>it calculates all the pins, hung pieces, and attacked and defended squares. It >>>>>then goes on to use this info in relevant places. >>>>> >>>>>I've been trying to figure out how I could do some of this stuff using bitboards >>>>>in GLC... but I'm still trying to figure it out... Imagine if you could use the >>>>>eval func of Phalanx in a fast searcher :-)) >>>>> >>>>>Cheers, Tim. >>>> >>>> >>>>Just like Alfred below, I am too impressed with GLC. About implementing a >>>>Phalanx-like eval in a fast searcher: I believe that Christophe Theron has >>>>already done a good deal in that respect :-)(just go through Gambtit's games...) >>>> >>>>*** Djordje >>> >>> >>>Erratum: ... I am too => I too am... :) >>> >>> >>>*** Djordje >> >> >>This seems to be one of those days :) Erratum 2: ... Gambtit => Gambit! >>Please, no one bring up Freudian slips or similar :) > >Freudian slips? I prefer Fruit of the Loom underwear myself, but your >recommendation is noted. > > Albert > >> >> >>*** Djordje Actually, I prefer them (slips) young, slender and tender, while you, Albert, have just got a pink slip :-) *** Djordje
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.