Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 15:58:33 10/06/01
Go up one level in this thread
On October 06, 2001 at 18:19:49, Slater Wold wrote: [snip] >I just think that you should respect a mainline, more than an eval. Evals are >very volatile, while mainlines are more solid. > >Once again, Program-A sees a position as winning, and gives it a +6.00 score. >Program-B sees the _SAME_ exact moves, and gives it +3.00. > >Which is correct? The one with the bigger eval? I just don't think that can be >trusted. Mainlines are just as volatile as the score. While I trust neither, I trust the score better than the mainline. Ideally, it will have both the score and the mainline correct, and then we can feel more secure about it. We must ask ourselves this question: If the mainline is correct, then why is the score wrong? The only answer can be that the computer has not found out yet why the move is good. It may very well be that there is some tiny tactical bonus found by taking the correct mainline, but the actual purpose is positional. Not only will the computer never get the true appraisal, but when it gets near the goal, it will play stupidly because it never does find the plan behind the move. In other words, both are suspect. If it has a high score, at least it *thinks* it found something good. If it has a low score, it definitely has *not* found a true solution -- it's only saying "this looks better than nothing."
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.