Author: Dale Kirton
Date: 09:59:27 01/10/03
Go up one level in this thread
On January 10, 2003 at 04:56:25, David Rasmussen wrote: >On January 09, 2003 at 14:17:06, Stan Arts wrote: > >>Hello, >> >>I often read computerprograms are so bad at correspondence chess. That would >>make sence, since they run up a very steep wall after about 10-15 full moves of >>analysis. >> >>Wouldn´t it be possible however to write a program, that could spend it´s hours/ >>days of time for a move in a different way, searching much shorter, say just 5 >>minutes or less per move and then automaticly "play" (like in normal games) >>lines against itself to great depths, sometimes discovering refutations, and >>then disregarding this move and try to resolve other moves this way. >> > >It is certainly possible to make a program with a "much" better branching factor >(meaning it will reach the "wall" at a higher depth), by making the program less >immediately tactically aware. That is, most programs go for discovering tactics >as soon as possible (which is very hard, and it is a non-trivial subject). But >one could make a program that wouldn't a very fast tactics finder (less >extensions specifically, but also a number of reductions), but which would have >a lower than usual branching factor, so that running for a number of days would >make it search deeper than a "normal" chess engine, but also be tactically >reasonably safe up to that depth. In fact, a personality could probably be >defined for this for programs that have a personality feature: Minimize >extensions, increase selectivity (certain kinds anyway) > >/David What do you mean by "minimize extensions"?
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.