Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 07:56:07 03/26/02
Go up one level in this thread
On March 26, 2002 at 10:24:38, James T. Walker wrote: James, book learning is very important when you have a very good initially tournament book. Because you can keep repeat a winnign line then. If such a strong tournament book kills completely automatic books, then PGN generated books make no chance simply. You get results like 50-4 then or similar. So important in the above example is the fact that you speak about 2 different books where the important features of learning is REPEATING won lines and avoiding lost or drawn lines. Usually this happens when 1 book is much better than the opponent. So retry your experiment using auto232 player i'd say. I see HUGE score differences between using learning and without learning. The difference between both using learning is near to zero of course, because there is not a single dude in history yet who could define intelligence. So if there is 1 path to always beat the other guy, then this will be found with book learning. It isn't actually *improving* a book of course. Improving a book is a manual thing to do. The real cool thing from learning is for SSDF purposes of course. >On March 26, 2002 at 09:36:41, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >>On March 25, 2002 at 13:35:33, James T. Walker wrote: >> >>at auto232 it is impossible to turn off booklearning in fritz. >> >>how did you turn it off? are you SURE you turned it off? > >Hello Vincent, >I guess I was not very clear in my original post below. I did not turn off any >book learning. As you say, it's impossible with Chessbase GUI. I simply >cleared the book learning in one computer and let the other computer learn from >1700 previous games. The purpose was to see if the learning function from 1700 >previous games helped in the match vs the computer which had no previous >learning experience. In my 200 games the score was 103-97 with the computer >with no previous learning the winner. So it appears there is no advantage to >book learning except to prevent one computer from finding an opponents weak >opening and playing it over and over again to get wins. Of course this is very >important. I was expecting the computer which had learned from 1700 previous >games to actually use this info to get a better score vs the one without any >previous learning. >JIm > > > > >>>I just did a quick test to see if there is any gain through book learning. I >>>loaded One computer with Fritz 7 and let it learn from the 3 databases I have >>>(more than 1700 games played by Fritz 7. In the other computer (both AMD 1.4G) >>>I cleared the book learning in Fritz 7 and played 100 games at G/1 minute (for >>>quick results of course). The final score: Fritz without previous book >>>learning won by 52-48. >>>Comments?/Conclusions?/Insults? >>>Jim
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.