Author: Uri Blass
Date: 02:11:01 08/17/02
Go up one level in this thread
On August 16, 2002 at 17:39:48, Manfred Meiler wrote: <snipped> >For all the other mentioned engines it seems to me that this test suite is too >hard for them. >The WM-Test was designed by the test authors Gurevich/Schumacher for engines >with playing strength in a range of 2500 - 2800 ELO (look at the attached readme >file) - in this point of view (ELO >=2500) I shouldn't have tested many of these >112 engines... :-) Did they check carefully that the test is correct? When I look at the pgn it seems that lines are not convincing for computer programs. For example in position 3 they give the line 1.Nf5 gxf5 2.gxf5 Nc7 3.Rg1 Ne8 and no word about the typical computer move Rf7. After Ne8 yace can see immediatly small advantage for white Bxh6 0.54/10,0.65/11,0.54/12 but after Rf7 it says Rg6 -0.37/10,Rxg7+ -0.28/10, Rxg7+ -0.47/11,Rg6 -0.30/11,Rg2 -0.21/11 Rg2 -0.22/12 Maybe it can see advantage for white after long analysis (I did not try it) but I think that it is better to give some tree to convince programs that the moves are correct(At least in part of the cases I cannot use the pgn together with yace's learning to prove that the solutions are winning moves in a reasonable time and I often cannot even convince it that the move to find is the best move). Uri
This page took 0.02 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.