Author: Steven J. Edwards
Date: 12:55:13 06/19/98
Go up one level in this thread
On June 19, 1998 at 15:04:21, Tim Mirabile wrote: >I've never been a big fan of this method. Even high level games tend to have >results which do not necessarily indicate who played best in the opening. But >it's hard to suggest another method that does not involve a lot of hand tuning. >Perhaps you could just suck in all of ECO and Informant, with evaluations, which >if not totally trustworthy would be more so than game results. I dislike the uniform distribution method mostly because it seems that a lot of information is being thrown away. But I also dislike the ECO/Informator transcription (I hear these can be had on CD-ROM nowadays) because it is particularly vunerable to attack by typo hunters who peruse the source input. Additionally, the Informator evaluations are really not scalars and some sort of multivariate weighting function would have to be used. And so we're back to the same type of problem as with weighting win/draw/loss results. I can think of ways to have a program tune its own book from PGN input files, but they all involve playing through the lines with heavy duty analysis to locate variations which conform to the program's search and evaluation. One idea I've considered is getting a couple of books with titles like _White to Play and Win, a Complete Opening Strategy for the Attacking Player_ and just copying the variations into the program's book. I think that a 5,000 move book would suffice for this, but once the opposition figured out what was going on, then it would be time for another book. -- Steven (sje@mv.mv.com)
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.