Author: rubidio
Date: 15:43:17 04/20/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 20, 2001 at 14:45:57, Kurt Utzinger wrote:
>On April 20, 2001 at 14:30:44, Dann Corbit wrote:
>
>>On April 20, 2001 at 12:06:53, Kurt Utzinger wrote:
>>
>>>On April 20, 2001 at 11:18:52, Divy wrote:
>>>
>>>>I noticed that your original post of the Utz settings has the material value for
>>>>Knights at 3. You now have it at 5 in a more recent post. Have you changed this
>>>>setting intentionally? Better results perhaps?
>>>>
>>>>-Divy
>>>
>>>Sorry, the material value for the Knight is 3 and not 5.
>>
>>I have an additional question about your settings. Since a recent post has
>>shown that there may be some statistical validity to the use of these settings,
>>I am wondering how did you arrive at them. Trial and error? A systematic
>>search? A gradient seeking program?
>
>Answer K.U.
>It was a combination of trial and systematic search. The CM8_Rubidio settings
>made to me a good impression, the games played confirmed that but I was still
>not satisfied with the results of some practical test positions. So I eventually
>tried to improve all the program's parameters that in my opinion should have a
>positive influence to a better mobility. That was all and suddenly the program
>played very well.
>Kurt
I agree Utzinger settings are the strongest. Good work Kurt!
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.