Author: John Merlino
Date: 09:07:04 12/13/02
Go up one level in this thread
On December 13, 2002 at 11:14:44, Dana Turnmire wrote: >It keeps coming up that positional tests aren't accurate because programs may >find the correct solution for the wrong reasons. Chessmaster 9000 has a unique >feature (as far as I know) that explains *why* it recommends the moves it does. >Would that solve the problem of knowing if it found the right answer for the >wrong reasons? If so would it be possible to add such a feature to the other >programs? The Natural Language Advice feature in CM9000 is only capable of showing the basic "top-level" aspects of why a move is chosen and what it accomplishes. The summary at the end of the advice attempts to show how the overall position has improved using very basic language (although not particularly basic algorithms) such as "mobility has increased" or "pawn structure has improved". All of this text is gleaned from the PV that The King engine sends. In other words, the GUI feature itself attempts to determine "why" the engine chose the move(s) that it did, rather than the engine explaining for itself. Johan and I considered adding this kind of expansion to the data that can be received from an engine and using it for just such a purpose. Basically, the evaulation from The King would have (or could have) been broken down into such aspects as material, pawn structure, mobility, king safety, etc., and this breakdown could have been used to enhance the advice feature to some degree. However, it was put on the back burner for the "next version". So, maybe someday.... jm
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.