Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Ed, are you going to do a corresponding analysis better than fritz5's?

Author: Ed Schröder

Date: 07:35:54 08/04/98

Go up one level in this thread


>>I see what you mean. The above quote has nothing to do with
>>playing normal games. Also there is no reference to playing
>>strength as you indicated.

>>I refer to what Fernando posted and also to one of the latest
>>CCC opinion polls. Through the years people started to use chess
>>program in another way. In the early days people (mostly)
>>played games against chess programs. These days 99% of people
>>lose all the time so the fun goes away.

>>So people looked for other ways to use chess programs. Based
>>on all the input I have received through the years (emails /
>>letters) I would say we have the following situation (for the
>>use of the engine only)...

>>- Play normal games (strongest settings)  10%
>>- Play handicapped games                  20%
>>- Use chess program for analysis          60%
>>- Use chess programs for COMP-COMP games  10%
>>
>>All estimated of course, just my personal opinion.

>>In this respect it makes a lot of sense to improve the "analysis"
>>part of Rebel. The above new feature of the engine is just an
>>extra. People want faster solution times for tactical positions
>>so they get what they want. Also a new fashion is automatic EPD
>>analysis as EPD is becoming more and more popular. So to make
>>(keep) your program attractive you write new EPD features. And
>>so on.

>>- Ed -

>I agree it makes a lot of sense to improve the "analysis" part of Rebel.

>1 option of analysis is to give the program to play against itself the main
>lines for some moves and create a tree of sensible moves.
>This option in fritz5 is called correspondence analysis.

>The correspondence analysis of fritz5 is silly because fritz5 does not use the
>alpha beta algoritam in the tree created by the games it plays and can analyze
>lines there is no reason to analyze.

>Fritz5 shows evaluation function only after the leaves of the tree and I
>prefer to see evaluation function after every move in the tree it creates.

>Another problem is that I cannot tell fritz5 to use more time in the games
>it plays against itself in moves near the initial position it analyzes.

I like the option anyway.

>I want to know if you are going to do a correspondence analysis better than
>fritz5's

Analysis include / exclude remains unchanged.

- Ed -


>Uri



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.