Author: Richard Pijl
Date: 01:51:34 11/22/02
Go up one level in this thread
On November 21, 2002 at 15:42:13, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On November 21, 2002 at 12:39:11, Richard Pijl wrote: > >>On November 21, 2002 at 12:25:19, GuyHaworth wrote: >> >>> >>>It ought to be possible to substitute for the 5-1 EGTs with some more compact >>>rulebase. Has 5-1 ever occurred over a serious board? I guess not. >>> >>>How would one set about creating that rulebase to cover all situations? Is it >>>just "5-1 = WIN"? >>> >>>g >> >>That is probably a bad idea. If all positions would be scored the same, how >>would you make progress in check-mating the king? > >See my response. I think it is doable with code I already have in Crafty that >handles "mop-up" cases (no pawns) easily... > My remark concerned the rule 5-1 = WIN. That is not true in every case. You can also construct a lot of stalemate situations, so the rulebase should cope with them too. And a single value for a score would be even worse as no progress will be made. When you mentioned the mop-up code in Crafty I was started looking for it and I think you mean EvaluateMate(). But that is only called in evaluation, so in leaf nodes. Stalemates are handled in search, and you use make sure that you measure progress in the score as well. Although it is more efficient than a regular evaluation it is not the same as probing an EGTB as that is done during search in the none-leaf nodes, enabling to do a beta-cutoff fast. But well, this discussion is a pretty academic one as a 5-1 piece majority doesn't happen all of a sudden :-) Richard.
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.