Author: Terry McCracken
Date: 15:00:04 01/06/03
Go up one level in this thread
On January 06, 2003 at 10:16:22, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On January 06, 2003 at 09:36:53, Bob Durrett wrote: > >> >>The concept of "trading down to a won endgame" and similar ideas such as >>avoiding a dangerous attack by trading down to an equal or slightly inferior >>endgame seem conceptually simple. >> >>Endgame knowledge is available everywhere. For example: >> >>The recent publication, "Fundamental Chess Endings" by Karsten Muller and Frank >>Lamprecht, copyright 2001, Gambit Publications, Inc., ISBN 1901983536, includes >>a table at the back of the book titled "Table of Computer Database Results for >>Pawnless Endings." This table provides "endgame knowledge" information, which >>could be [and probably is] used by chess engine programmers. Similar >>information appears elsewhere in the written chess literature. >> >>A chess engine position evaluation could check to see if the position matches up >>with one of the known endgame types. [This might take special dedicated >>software.] Then the knowledge could be used to determine whether or not to >>exchange down to that endgame. I'm sure [??] that modern chess programs do >>something like that, although perhaps not aimed at making an "exchange down or >>not to exchange down" type of "decision." >> >>The idea that a position would receive a numerical value is common. But is it >>really necessary that search choices be based solely on such numerical >>evaluations? Perhaps modern chess engines are not that simplistic? >> >>In summary: I don't see why a chess engine should have any trouble at all in >>positions where exchanging down to an endgame is indicated. What am I missing? >> >>Bob D. > > >Nothing. This is done by many programs now, mine included. Not all understand >key ingredients such as distant pawn majorities, but most recognize classes of >endgames that are favorable to them... Hi Bob, Check my post. I think it's important for machines to be given lessons, beyond EGTBS for such positions. The book is wrote, we don't neglect it, and programmers work hard on the middlegame, but these relatively simple K+P endings get little attention. I haven't tried Crafty on this following position. http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?275232 Terry
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.