Author: Bruce Moreland
Date: 09:40:47 01/16/03
Go up one level in this thread
On January 15, 2003 at 21:22:56, Russell Reagan wrote: >On January 15, 2003 at 18:54:55, David Rasmussen wrote: > >>I understand what he's saying. What I would like is a test position that I can >>use for testing a repetition scheme for a certain problem. In this case, I would >>like a position that I could start with, enter some (suboptimal) moves manually >>to get the positions in the game history position list, and then do a search >>from the resulting position, that would result in the problem described, if the >>repetition scheme used had the bug/problem in question. > >I wouldn't hold your breath. This seems very non-deterministic. For example, >even if you could produce a position that caused a problem for YOUR engine, it >may only occur once for YOUR program and never again. How much time you have, >and how you search, and all kinds of things will go into this. I think it will >be something that is very engine specific. IE my engine might have a problem >with a particular position, but if you run your program on it, and all goes >well, are you going to assume your repetition detection is working? There isn't >really a kiwipete position for repetition detection, I don't think. It can't be done with a standard test suite, because it's a test "situation", not a test "position". The example with the knight fork is perfect. I described something similar without providing a diagram. The problem with ignoring positions that are "one in the tree, one in the history", is that the program tends to diddle around, because it can make 2x reps without suffering a penalty. I didn't provide any examples of a program diddling around. bruce
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.