Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Proposal: New testing methods for SSDF (1)

Author: Bruce Moreland

Date: 10:39:07 04/13/98

Go up one level in this thread



On April 13, 1998 at 13:26:06, Enrique Irazoqui wrote:

>I agree about testing programs on equal platforms. Instead, I don't
>think the rest is necessary. Programs should be considered as a whole:
>books, engine, table bases. Learners, even better if in combination with
>wide books, take care of cooks and double games. In my opinion this is
>not an issue any more.

Absolutely.  Bigger, better books, and better learners.  We aren't in
Chess Challenger 7 times anymore, you don't want to be out of book after
1. d4 Nf6.

>As for autoplayers, I have seen enough erratic behavior from auto232
>games to consider it flawless and to accept it as the mandatory
>standard.
>- Programs overruling the autoplayer by playing longer games than
>allowed by the /m parameter.
>- Programs that terminate the game for no apparent reason.
>- Programs that terminate the game and count it as a win when in their
>evaluation the opponent is at - 5, forcing the opponent to resign.
>- Programs that terminate a game when arbitrarily decide it's a double
>game.

Right, every game should go to mate, or a claimable draw, and the
autoplayer should enforce this.

I have heard that Rebel does some of the above if you set up a match on
your own, but it's turned off for the SSDF list, I thought.

>Tricks are possible even through a standard auto232 device. If programs
>learned to take care of themselves regarding cooked lines, they should
>do the same about possible autoplaying tricks.

No, the autoplayer should enforce this.  It shouldn't be allowed to try
to mess with the autoplayer.

>In the end, and thanks to learners, engines decide the outcome of games
>more now than before, because cooks and doubles in games played by new
>programs are infrequent enough to be of statistic significance. So I
>don't see the use of complicating matters in this area. Instead, I think
>learners are a genuine improvement.

Right.

bruce



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.