Author: Sune Fischer
Date: 09:25:19 11/17/02
Go up one level in this thread
On November 17, 2002 at 12:15:47, Bob Durrett wrote: I think you should read here what Bruce says about that, the solution is to extend with a small search to quiet out the position, it's call a quiescent search: http://www.seanet.com/~brucemo/topics/quiescent.htm Really you should read his whole site! -S. >The best way for a human to evaluate a tactical position is, presumably, to look >at lines (beginning with forced move sequences) emanating from that position. > >But I wonder . . . > >Is it possible to just look for "indicators" in the position which would >indicate the likelihood of a combination being present? I have read some >writings of GMs in hardcopy chess books about this. They seem to suggest that >positions containing combinations "smell" like a combination. In other words, >the GM is alerted to the possibility of a combination even though he has not yet >found it. > >Assume, for the sake of discussion, that this is true. i.e. that it is POSSIBLE >to detect the likely presence of a combination, without looking at any move >sequences. It would be sufficient if it worked most of the time. > >If true, then it might be possible to use this to improve evaluation of >positions, especially leaf node positions. > >Maybe it would take a GM to specify what the chess engine's position evaluator >would have to look for. But is it doable? > >Better yet, do the present-day top chess engines already do this during position >evaluation? At least to some extent? > >Just a thought. > >Bob D.
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.