Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 06:59:15 08/28/98
Go up one level in this thread
On August 27, 1998 at 21:54:31, Jeff Anderson wrote: >I think Mr. Iacovoni's idea has some merit. Here is a possible way I think it >could be done. Please excuse me if I use incorrect terms, I am pretty new to >this computer chess stuff. >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >There would be two chess engines. One would be an extremely fast and tactical >engine, the other would be a 'positional' engine as Mr. Iacovoni has suggested. >The positional engine would search and generate scores for the different moves >and such. Simultaneously the fast or tactical engine would be performing the >same sort search. > >At the end of each programs search, if the tactical engine has found a forced >mate or decisive win in material, or that the program's move is forced, that >move will be played. If not then the program will see if the positional >engine's top move is a blunder according to the fast tactical engine. If it is >not a blunder then this move will be played. If it is a blunder than the >program will check to see if the fast tactical engine thinks the positional >engines second best move is a blunder. If it is not then that will be played, >and if it is a blunder the third best move is checked and so on. >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- I hate to throw a damper on this, but it won't work, period. The first reason is that if the tactical engine rejects the positional engine's best move, the positional engine won't have a "second-best" move to try, because alpha/beta doesn't produce that. To obtain it, you have to do a full re-search, but with the rejected best move eliminated from consideration. To make this work, you take a *huge* performance hit, and will play far worse than if you do what we are doing now... > >My idea is so simple I think even I could program it if I had the two engines >that would produce scores for each legal move. This could be done other ways >too. For example you could have one engine that searched with extreme >selectivity, then you could have a brute-force engine that would make certain >that the selective engine did not overlook anything simple. > >Jeff
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.