Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Has CSTAL an Special Search Device?

Author: Graham Laight

Date: 08:33:55 04/08/98

Go up one level in this thread


This is very interesting commentary.

But doesn't a program like hiarcs have the same effect on its aggressive
setting?

On April 07, 1998 at 23:01:40, Fernando Villegas wrote:

>
>After my last game against CTAL -white.exe version-, when I was trying
>to hold all together -I did not make it- against an untiring attack, I
>have had something like a revelation about how this program maybe works
>and the reason of, at the same time, his proficiency against average,
>experienced, expert an even Fide  master class  players and at the same
>time his “weakness” against the very top programs in terms of SSDF
>ratings.
>My impression was and is this: that CSTAL not only make good use of a
>far great knowledge code than other programs, but besides, and maybe
>more important, it makes use of a search technique very different to the
>well known Maximin kind of search, where in each node the program pick
>up the moves that gives the lower rating -or the less high- to his
>rival.
>It’s my impression that CSTAL uses a search technique where the purpose
>is, inside certain limits, to get  moves that produces maximal pressure
>for the adversary and not the minimal score for his best available move.
> That “maximal pressure” would be equal to get a maximal number of
>threats and dangers for the rival even at the cost, some times, to let
>one or more candidate moves that, if picked up, surpass the maximin
>standard approach.
>The presupposition that Chris W probably did was a very obvious one:
>humans are not, inside the tactical horizon of the game, so precise and
>almost perfect as programs are to select ever the best move to hold back
>a threat in tactical terms; on the contrary, they get tired, lose
>concentration, lose nerve and lastly, after doing well under many
>attacks, commit the last, fatal mistake.
>My experience with CSTAL is precisely that: he launch an attack after
>another with the idea that sooner or later, under pressure, you are
>going to choose one of the moves that maximizes his advantage and not
>the move that gives you a best chance, even if theroretically exist. In
>fact, is not that what happens in normal game between humans? How many
>times a human game goes trough and trough the best moves for each side?
>For the same reason CSTAL does not so good against computers, that does
>not get trired and calculate everything inside a normal horizon of let
>us say 7 to 12 ply.
>Am I mistaken? If some programmer is there to show the Light....
>Fernando



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.