Author: Russell Reagan
Date: 13:20:30 07/16/02
Go up one level in this thread
On July 16, 2002 at 15:14:17, Omid David wrote: >Each program has its own style and thus should play openings which fit its >style. Of course these openings should be tuned by the programmer, so a good >deal of chess knowledge is necessary on programmer's behalf. > >As an example, in tournaments I always play Sicilian against 1.e4 and adopt the >Scheveningen variation, so I need to have a vast knowledge of Scheveningen (and >Najdorf) while I can forget about Caro-Kann! Programs too should have their own >opening repertoire consisting of an extensive knowledge of all variations which >might occur in their chosen opening variations, while they can forgo other >variations. > >Omid. Thanks Omid. I have another question. Let's take an example. Let's say that my program has a Ruy Lopez line that goes to move 20, and then the book stops there. Would it be advantageous to let my program think from that position for, say, a week, and then add that move to my book? That way I have a week's worth of search instantly. The only thing that I forsee as a problem is the same problem that a beginner who memorizes book lines has. For example, let's say my program plays the last move in the book (the one that was searched on for a week), and it plays it, and my opponent responds, and then my program doesn't have access to the long variation that it had in the week long search, so now my program *might* (not sure about this) be just like the booked up beginner who doesn't know what to do when it leaves the book. For example, the program might need to search to 20 plies to "see" the reasoning for it's previous move, and if it can only get to, say, 16 plies in the given time slot in a game situation, it might not follow that PV line. Do you see this as something that might be a problem? Thanks, Russell
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.