Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Book vs. Engine

Author: José Carlos

Date: 06:50:47 08/26/02

Go up one level in this thread


On August 26, 2002 at 09:27:10, Steve Coladonato wrote:

>On August 26, 2002 at 09:02:12, Matthias Gemuh wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>I (www.gemuh.de) am of the opinion that books should by law be limited to 14
>>moves. This is enough to (almost) finish development and let the engines take
>>over with almost all fighters still available for the battle.
>>Engines should not be helped (???) beyond this point.
>>
>>Matthias.
>
>Matthias,
>
>I tend to agree with you here.  It seems that "chess programs" are more a
>function of the "book" rather than the capability of the engine.  Yet somewhere,
>the engine has to go out of book so why couldn't that be after 14 moves and why
>couldn't the SSDF provide a "standard" book for tournaments.  Are they
>evaluating the engine or the book's author?
>
>Of course having a "standard" book means nothing if, in fact, the book usage is
>embedded in the engine as mentioned by other threads here.  Why can't book calls
>be a routine separate from the basic engine code.  But I don't program engines
>so I don't really know.  It just seems that the engines performance is skewed
>way too far towards the book it uses rather than it's analytical capabilities.
>
>Steve

  If you're only interested in analytical capabilities, a match with same book
won't work, because pondering scheme, time management, asymetrical eval, etc
will make the test worthless. If you only want to test analytical capabilities
you'd better use a big test suite, IMO.

  José C.



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.