Author: Uri Blass
Date: 09:47:32 12/11/02
Go up one level in this thread
On December 11, 2002 at 10:46:08, Sune Fischer wrote: >On December 11, 2002 at 10:00:38, Johan Hutting wrote: > >>On December 11, 2002 at 07:44:43, Sune Fischer wrote: >> >>>Chess is primarily tactics, >> >>Vincent does have a point, to get into a position where you can use those >>tactics you require positional knowledge. Any 1600+ rated player can tell you >>that :) > >Vincent was arguing a different point. I agree with him that it would be hard to >write a top level program with only 2000 lines of code, but I don't believe it >is impossible. > >I'm pretty sure there is still room for improvement in the area of search. >And probably evaluation is secondary to search in 95% of the cases. > >>My guess is Uri uses a very simple patzer eval with big bonusses for good pieces >>along with a fast search. So far it makes movei play good, but if you wish to >>improve you'll run into a wall. > >I think you can write a lot of important eval in 2000 lines. >The basic pawn structure and king safety issues can be done in 2000 lines. > >>>if you have near _optimal_ extensions and near >>>_optimal_ pruning rules, then you could probably get those extra plies on your >>>opponent and could win WCCC using tactics. >> >>but, with a bigger eval and good pruning you will still search the promising >>lines deeper, right? > >Of course, but you also see eval hurting at times, no rules without excepton as >they say. For instance the trapped bishop codes are often wrong, Bxa2 b3 a5! and >maybe we have time to free the bishop here or can simply protect it with Ra8 or >Qb2... > >Not a whole lot of things are easy to staticly evaluate, only simple patterns >like isolated double pawns can be relatively safely scored, IMO. > >>>My guess is that Fritz would still be mighty strong even if they had to limit >>>their eval to 2000 lines. >> >>It would be outplayed by more positional programs and perhaps score some 'lucky' >>wins. But that's in 'slow' tempo games, blitz is another matter. > >With basic eval I wouldn't fear any program that I outsearched two plies in the >midgame, endgame is another matter as the tactics is often few and far between. > >IIRC the author of Ruffian said the secret was in the extensions and pruning >rules. :) > >-S. I can also say that I agree. I think that with 2000 lines you can evaluate mobility,king safety pawn structure and have some knowledge about endgames. This togeteher with outsearching fritz5 by 2-3 plies is clearly enough to have a top program. I do not think that it is impossible to write something better than Fritz5's evaluation in 2000 lines but even if we assume for the discussion that we use Fritz5's evaluation then I still believe that Fritz5 with hardware that is 10 times faster than the opponents is not weaker than the top programs of today. I also believe that being 10 time faster than Fritz5 in tactic is not an impossible task(I do not say that it is easy task and as far as I know nobody until today got close to achieving it) 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.