Author: Uri Blass
Date: 05:07:26 08/26/02
Go up one level in this thread
On August 26, 2002 at 07:22:28, Steve Coladonato wrote: >There is a very long thread here concerning the use of a book developed for one >program being used by another program. I am not a programmer, so I don't >understand the ramifications of this. But, I do have a question(s). If the >same book were used by all engines, would that not be a fair comparison of the >engines strength? As long as a program is "in" book, it is not using any of its >internal algorithms so the moves it is making are recognized as "best" for a >particular line/opening. I doubt if it is a good idea. I think that there should be a small book when the program plays moves in 0 seconds and a big book when the program read the book but does not play the moves in 0 seconds. I saw cases of big tactical mistakes by program because of a mistake in a book happen and it is easy at least to prevent it(if we know that a move is good and the program evaluates it as a blunder we can put it in the small book). > >Would a book, the one in question in the thread, be better than ECO or NCO? And >if so, why is it not published. Or, is the book in question, mainly oriented to >tactical play to match the accepted strength of computers. I see no general advanatge for tactical play in comp-comp games. > Have the lines in >the book been developed by a computer or are they still the lines that have been >developed by Masters since whenever? I am sure that a lot of lines were developed by masters but it does not mean that the masters did not use computers to help them. 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.