Author: Ricardo Gibert
Date: 10:44:41 01/16/02
Go up one level in this thread
On January 16, 2002 at 13:26:24, Roy Eassa wrote: >On January 16, 2002 at 07:41:28, Graham Laight wrote: > >>It has occurred to me that it is wrong to evaluate a position in terms of >>relative pawns (the "de facto" standard - whereby an evaluation of 2 means that >>you're approximately the equivalent of 2 pawns ahead). >> >>This means that many aspects of evaluation have to be squeezed into a dimension >>which is not appropriate at all. >> >>A better way would be to evaluate "winning probability". If a position was a >>draw, the value would be 0.50 (or 50%). If the player should win 3 out of 4 >>times, the eval should be 75%. If the player must win from here, then the >>evaluation should be 100%. > > >I had the exact same thought some time ago. But I figured the "ingredients" in >determining the value are the same either way. There should be a simple way to >convert from one to the other. E.g., a table something like this might do the >trick: > >Pawns ahead % Chance to Win >----------- --------------- >0.0 50 >0.1 51 >0.2 52 >0.3 53 >0.4 54 >0.5 55 >0.6 56 >0.7 57 >0.8 58 >0.9 59 >1.0 60 >1.5 66 >2.0 77 >3.0 88 >5.0 99 > >Then the program could just show whichever value the user prefers. (Of course, >the probabilities I used above are off the cuff, but they seem reasonable to me >at first glance.) IM Kaufman did some statistical work and came up with 1 pawn worth to be about 75% if I remember correctly. I think he made some arbitrary assumption about compensation, though, so I'd take it with a grain of salt. Of course, I understand that you are merely providing an example. So my comment is just FYI.
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.