Author: Tim Foden
Date: 14:26:08 04/14/02
Go up one level in this thread
On April 14, 2002 at 13:57:38, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >On April 14, 2002 at 13:37:19, Alessandro Damiani wrote: > >>Hi Vincent, >> >>You too much concentrated on the game Mawari. I think they choose Mawari to have >>a simple framework to experiment with. I guess a Mawari engine is far simpler >>than a Chess one. So, forget Mawari. :) >> >>You are right, alpha-beta evaluation functions are like lazy evaluation. But, >>the big difference is that an alpha-beta evaluation function is an algorithm >>that traverses a classification tree. I have in mind the picture of an ordered >>hierarchical structure of position features (a tree of features). At first sight >>it seemed to me like that (right, I didn't take the time to read the whole text >>:). >> >>We both agree on the bad effect of lazy evaluation on positional play, but an >>alpha-beta evaluation function seems to be different: the bounds on a feature's >>value range are not estimated. >> >>But maybe I am wrong. > >Yes you are wrong. No, he is not. They are not doing lazy-evaluation. Maybe you should read the article before making pronouncements about whether they are doing what you _think_ they are doing. At the time they are comparing with alpha-beta, they are _not_ guessing. Whether what they are doing would be applicable to chess is another thing entirely. Tim.
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.