Computer Chess Club Archives




Subject: Re: likelihood instead of pawnunits? + chess knowledge

Author: Severi Salminen

Date: 02:24:39 10/26/02

Go up one level in this thread

>the idea of evaluation the chances to win, instead of giving an evaluation
>that is MATERIAL+POSITIONAL sounds very similar to CSTal's evaluation.
>CSTal has no "accurate" evaluation, instead the evaluation shows how
>high the chances are to win.
>this helps cstal to plan a king attack e.g.

Nonsense. It doesn't matter what units you use to give scores to a move: pawns,
probability, whatever. You still need to figure out which move is better than
the others. You can do this with three probabilities, but it will result the
exact same 1-dimensional list of moves where one is considered better than
others (or equally good).

And what on earth has king attack to do with this??? Where did you get that one?


This page took 0.01 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 07 Jul 11 08:48:38 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.