Author: maria clara benedicto
Date: 18:38:46 03/17/02
Go up one level in this thread
Dear Mr. Christophe Theron, Sir, you explanations very fine. understand clearly. thanks maria p.s. at least you dont tell us "read ------.doc...." On March 16, 2002 at 22:34:46, Christophe Theron wrote: >On March 16, 2002 at 19:53:13, stuart taylor wrote: > >>On March 16, 2002 at 10:31:31, Christophe Theron wrote: >> >>>On March 15, 2002 at 16:40:55, Uri Blass wrote: >>> >>>>On March 15, 2002 at 13:50:33, Christophe Theron wrote: >>>> >>>>>On March 15, 2002 at 02:38:05, stuart taylor wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On March 14, 2002 at 08:03:23, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: > >>>>>Well I'm glad that you ask. Usually people just ask about the release date of >>>>>the program, without apparent interest for what will be in it. >>>>> >>>>>What's going on with Tiger since version 14.0 is that unlike the previous years >>>>>I have worked a lot of the EVALUATION of the program. I have tried to work on >>>>>evaluation holes (mising knowledge about positional features) and tried to fill >>>>>these holes with good chess knowledge. >>>>> >>>>>For example there is much more endgame evaluation in Tiger 15. Also better >>>>>evaluation of the bishop pair (it took approximately 2 months of extensive >>>>>research). >>>>> >>>>>I have worked on search algorithms less than the previous years because as I >>>>>said above I focused on the evaluation function. However Tiger15's search is >>>>>already better than Tiger14's. I'm getting a much better search depth in the >>>>>endgame for example, and many selection holes have been fixed. I also get better >>>>>results when mates combinations start to appear on the board. >>>>> >>>>>Overall I have the feeling that Chess Tiger 15 will not be much better than CT14 >>>>>in fast games, but that the difference will be clearly seen at long time >>>>>controls because of better stability (reliability) of the evaluation and less >>>>>selection holes. >>>> >>>>I do not understand >>>>I remember that you say that fixing the evaluation is more important for palm >>>>tiger because the difference is bigger when you cannot search deep enough so >>>>I thought that there is going to be bigger improvement in blitz based on your >>>>posts. >>>> >>>>Uri >>> >>> >>> >>>There are different categories of knowledge. >>> >>>It looks like when you are really lacking depth (Palm version, searching 5-6 >>>plies in blitz but only 3-4 on some moves) you have to add knowledge aimed at >>>avoiding tactical traps (better evaluation of pins for example) because you >>>can't even see them by search. I would call this "tactical knowledge". >>> >>>Then there is a stage when your search depth starts to be enough to avoid most >>>tactics (say 10 plies and up). At that point what you need the most is long term >>>positional knowledge. The kind of knowledge to tell you that you are going into >>>a won or lost endgame for example, or that this weakness is going to hurt you >>>until the end of the game. >>> >>>In the new Tiger I have been working more on long term positional knowledge. >>> >>>In blitz games tactical abilities are more important. In long games, long term >>>positional knowledge plays a bigger role, and that's why I expect the gains to >>>be more obvious at long time controls. >>> >>> >>> >>> Christophe >> >>That's good! >>Then you can take a vacation for a few years whilst quicker hardware will >>automatically make your program stronger and stronger. >>S.Taylor > > > >That would be great. :) > >But I don't really need a vacation. I love what I do. > > > > 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.