Author: Albert Silver
Date: 16:53:18 08/18/02
Go up one level in this thread
On August 18, 2002 at 06:27:08, Uri Blass wrote:
>On August 17, 2002 at 23:14:12, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>
>>On August 17, 2002 at 17:43:15, Mike S. wrote:
>>
>>i hope you realized i put serious time in some positions
>>of their testset, in order
>>to find out that i have put more time in the positions than
>>they have when i started emailing them about it.
>>
>>If they use the word time. they mean 'computer time'.
>
>I think that only computer time is needed to generate a good test suite.
>I try to generate a good test suite based on games of movei in the 3th division
>of the winboard programs but it is going to take time.
>
>I am going to put only mistakes when there is a difference of more than one pawn
>between the score of yace after the move and the score of yace before the move
>after long analysis.
I don't think you need long analysis for this. Basically, if the eval drops
significantly even after short analysis (10-15 seconds per move) you can be sure
something happened either the last move or a few moves ago (maybe it only saw
the problem a few moves after the blunder). When you see this sudden change, you
can use your own judgement, with the help of an engine, to see what happened.
You could then determine what the best move should have been, and whether it
constitutes a good test move.
Albert
>
>I will be happy if there are people who are interested in helping me.
>
>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.