Author: Uri Blass
Date: 06:58:27 08/01/01
Go up one level in this thread
On August 01, 2001 at 09:08:08, Gordon Rattray wrote: >On July 31, 2001 at 22:35:26, Christophe Theron wrote: > >>On July 31, 2001 at 19:18:36, Roy Eassa wrote: >> >>>On July 31, 2001 at 15:26:08, Ed Panek wrote: >>> >>>>On July 31, 2001 at 15:24:48, Roy Eassa wrote: >>>> >>>>>On July 31, 2001 at 15:21:17, Ed Panek wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>Lets say I have a move generator that selects a random move every time it is its >>>>>>turn. What are the odds against it drawing/winning a game? Is it less likely >>>>>>than winning a game of Keno with all the correct numbers picked? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>Is the opponent Kramnik or Deeper Blue? Or a human rated 400? Or another such >>>>>"random" program? I think this matters. >>>> >>>>Lets try a random opponent first...and then Kramnik >>>> >>>>Ed >>> >>> >>>Obviously, the chance of beating another random-playing program is 50% (not >>>counting draws). >> >> >>It depends how is programmed the random opponent. >> >>If the opponent just picks a move at random, odds are 50%. >> >>If the opponent is a program that does some sort of of alpha beta on a tree >>where the leaves receive random numbers, this opponent will win very often. >> >>That means: a random evaluation function is much stronger than a program >>choosing a move at random. > >Do you assume that a move leading immediately to checkmate, stalemate, etc. >returns a meaningful (non-random) value? If not, I don't understand why your >claim holds true? I assume a "random evaluation function" to be random for >*all* positions. > >Gordon I agree with christophe that the question is what randomness means. If the evaluation is the material evaluation +some random number between +2 pawns and -2 pawns then the program clearly does not play random moves and you can describe it as random evaluation. Uri
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.