Author: Uri Blass
Date: 20:55:32 11/12/02
Go up one level in this thread
On November 12, 2002 at 19:22:23, Bob Durrett wrote: >On November 12, 2002 at 18:20:54, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On November 12, 2002 at 17:56:14, Bob Durrett wrote: >> >>>On November 12, 2002 at 17:49:48, Uri Blass wrote: >>> >>>>On November 12, 2002 at 17:39:55, Bob Durrett wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>Without using a chess engine to check my intuition, my first impression is that >>>>>king safety issues dominate. If true, then this is really a test of the >>>>>engine's ability to recognize that fact. >>>>> >>>>>Bob D. >>>> >>>>No >>>> >>>>Movei has no king safety evaluation >>> >>>????????????????? >>> >>>My chin fell to the floor when I read that! You do not have ANYTHING in your >>>program at all having to do with king safety??? >>> >>>Again relying on my "naked intuition," I would have thought that no chess engine >>>could even exist without that. >>> >>>King safety is "lesson number one" in teaching of HUMAN chess players. >>> >>>Bob D. >> >>It knows that it should not go forward with the king except endgame thanks to >>piece square table but not more than it. >> >>Note that I do not try to teach humans to play chess but to teach my program to >>play chess better. >> >>I plan to teach it about king safety in the future but today I improve it by >>other ways. > >That makes a lot of sense. Good idea. : ) > >Nevertheless, I still find it remarkable that your program can do well without >SOMETHING at least distantly related to king safety. Maybe the answer is: "If >you play good chess, you won't get checkmated." > >Bob D. I think that mobility is related to king safety and movei evaluates mobility based on the number of the legal move(it is not the best way to evaluate mobility but it is better than nothing). 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.