Author: Don Dailey
Date: 16:13:29 06/03/98
Go up one level in this thread
On June 03, 1998 at 12:52:29, Komputer Korner wrote: >On June 03, 1998 at 08:42:37, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On June 03, 1998 at 00:51:13, Komputer Korner wrote: >> >>> >>>Okay I will use the KK Kup book from now on, but when I used the small >>>book that was created from a 400 game Morphy pgn file from M-Chess 7.1, >>>I used the n parameter as well. >> >> >>that's not really a "book". Because 99% of the moves will not be >>trusted since they weren't played more than once, and it also won't >>give much "coverage" for the normal openings either.. > >Doesn't the "n" parameter mean that any n > 1 means that all moves must >have been played at least n times. If so then Crafty will have enough >observations to give each move a rating, so I don't understand your >comments about this. >I have seen the following happen more than once. I built the book with >the n parameter at least = 3. "WCrafty XX uses its book for a certain x >number of games and then after that, refuses to use its book anymore. So >I rebuilt it using another book/set of games. However, it may have been >because it decided that all lines were bad after losing to Comet. So I >will try the KK Kup book from now on. Human chess masters add to their >books and play from their books even though there is a possibility of >the line becoming refuted through deeper analysis. Speed increases on >the order of doubling every 1.5-2 years will not enable many refutations >of book lines that have been played successfully by Crafty. If it does >happen that Crafty loses a game from one of these lines then Crafty can >always back the analysis up to see where the losing move was and adjust >its book accordingly if the book was at fault. Crafty would have lost >that game anyway assuming it's knowledge and search were the same, >because the line would only have been added to Crafty's book (if you >will implement this feature)because and THIS IS IMPORTANT, CRAFTY WOULD >HAVE calculated the line anyway in a previous game. So it might as well >be added to Crafty's book until it is refuted. This will save thinking >time. Of course, any time the search algorithm or knowledge is changed >then a new book should be created that will optimize the play of the NEW >Crafty. BUT assuming a constant Crafty it would be very interesting to >see Crafty create a book of its own (without any limits) based on its >own play. This would be like an AI project but an AI project that would >be strictly a chess opening book project. I am thinking about putting a simple chess program on the web without an opening book. My plan is to let it build it's own. I don't expect it to do as well, but it's an experiment. Here is a general outline: It will mimick the human. On the first move out of book it will take the move its opponent plays and insert it into the book. There may be a simple screening process to make sure obvious blunders don't get in. There will be a learning algorithm similar to Bob's so that these moves will get punished also if they are bad ones. Additionally, the program will add it's own moves and then eventually learn what is right and wrong from the learning algorithm. Eventually, as it see's different moves from different players it will be developing it's own book. I will keep careful records of all the moves and their status, or how they were arrived at. There may be an external process that also deep searches positions (from it's own games) looking for new ideas to throw into the book. I have doubts this will be as good as what we are doing, but I think it will be an interesting experiment. I'll keep an eye on it and as I see problems with the technique I might find solutions. - Don
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.