Author: Uri Blass
Date: 06:58:42 11/03/01
Go up one level in this thread
On November 02, 2001 at 13:58:37, Christophe Theron wrote: >On November 02, 2001 at 00:57:36, Dr. Franklin wrote: > >>On November 01, 2001 at 15:27:59, Christophe Theron wrote: >> >>>On November 01, 2001 at 15:06:44, ERIQ wrote: >>> >>>>Will it be win xp, palm, pocketpc, mac x, linux, or all of the above ? and will >>>>It be duel ? my wish would be duel under all flavors of unix for stability >>>>ie.linux, mac x, freebsd etc. >>> >>> >>> >>>There will not be a "Gambit Tiger 15". >>> >>>From version 15 on, it's Chess Tiger. What you call "Gambit" is now the default >>>personality of Chess Tiger. >>> >>>A personality emulating the more quiet style of Chess Tiger 14 will be provided. >>> >>>But the product name will be "Chess Tiger 15". >>> >>>After so many years, my program now deserves the name "Tiger" because of its >>>agressiveness. :) >>> >>>For which platform will it be available first? >>> >>>Chess Tiger for Palm is likely to be the first product to feature the Tiger 15 >>>engine. >>> >>>Actually as soon as the Tiger 15 engine has been tested and is reliable it will >>>be sent for release in all products (PC all licensees, Palm and PocketPC). But >>>as the Palm version has a shorter distribution lag (because it is sold directly >>>through the Internet), it is likely to be available just a few days after the >>>Tiger 15 engine is ready. >>> >>>When? Don't ask. :) >>> >>> >>> >>> Christophe >> >> >> >> Hello Chris >> >> >> I am not doubting your expertise, but how exactly would a Programmer actually >>know if his program has improved? Actually I can see no difference between >>fritz6 or Fritz7 since I am a relatively weak player, not Master strength. When >>you Develope your program i am wondering if You consult Master level players? > > > >Sometimes I get an advice from a strong player, but human players cannot tell me >if my program has become stronger or not. > >If you ask a human player you'll just get a subjective answer because here we >are talking of 30-50 elo points improvement of an already very strong opponent. >That's not something that can be detected by playing a few games against it. > >Part of the work of chess programming is developping a way of making sure that a >change in the program is really an improvement. When you see a strong chess >program, you can be sure that its programmer has found a good way of testing the >improvements. > >Chess programmers who are not willing to invest a large part of their time >developping this testing method end up being unable to improve their programs. >Because when a program is already very strong, any change has equal chances to >make it slightly stronger or slightly weaker. There is no way to tell if a >change will work or not before you test it very extensively. I am sure that it is truth for part of the changes but not for every change. If you change a parameter in the evaluation or add knowledge in the evaluation or change the search rules then I agree but it is also possible that you discover a way to make the program 1% faster and in this case you do not need a lot of testing and the only thing that you need to test is that you have no new bugs. Uri > > > > Christophe
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.