Author: Tom Kerrigan
Date: 23:08:58 09/27/98
Go up one level in this thread
It seems to me that if you have lots of "modules" to handle the types of positions you might encounter, the modules will all be very similar to each other (e.g., almost all of them will have a doubled pawn term), and it would be inconvienant to switch modules during a search. If you have one huge evaluation function that turns terms on and off depending on the position, it seems like it would do better and take less effort to write. -Tom On September 27, 1998 at 15:14:38, Fernando Villegas wrote: >On September 27, 1998 at 15:02:24, Tom Kerrigan wrote: > >>This sounds all fine and good, but it turns out that most programs already do >>this to some degree. Every term in an evaluation function isn't evaluated in >>every position. Many terms depend on particular circumstances or the amount of >>material on the board, so while the same function is being executed all the >>time, only certain parts of it are used and with "appropriate" values. >> >> > > >Hi Tom: >I imagined it, but the question is how much is done in that way. The "some >degree" is the question. In fact how much of a superior intelect the first >module is. Maybe just a table to say "there are few pieces, this is an ending". >But something more intelligent to smell where the game is going? >Fernando > >-Tom >> >>On September 27, 1998 at 14:32:27, Fernando Villegas wrote: >> >>> >>>Reading a post by Schroeder where he explain how his anti GM works only if >>>certain circumstances happens, I wonder if the same principle of a program that >>>is in pieces or modules differently activated according to circumstances has >>>been made before, and at which degree. I wrote a long and cumbersome post long >>>ago about that and I do not remember if a programmer answered it or not, so with >>>your pardon let me give of that idea a very tightened resume. >>>My idea was: lets a program be constituted by a module dedicated only to >>>determinate what must be searched and then, with it, a normal program cut in >>>pieces differently assembled together according to occasion. The idea was to >>>simulate what a good player in fact do. A good player does not calculate every >>>available move applying to each of them his entire set of knowledge; he, first, >>>decides what to look at. There is some smell of tactics in his king side? Should >>>he look for them? Instead, should he thinks in terms of strategic advantages to >>>get in the queen side? etc...Once he has grasped the essence of the position, >>>that is, where action is, then and only then he begins to use that specific part >>>of his knowledge acumen necessary for the task. >>>Why not a program with a kind of device similar to that to decide where the >>>action is and then use the necessary modules for the rest of the job? By >>>example, if the position calls for tactics, then he would uses only the >>>algorithms oriented to tactics, maybe with full width searching, etc. But then >>>if an strategic approach is necessary in the queen side, he drops the tactic >>>part of the engine and concentrates all his speed in evaluating strategic >>>parameters such as pwan races, etc. >>>Of course some mix should be made: maybe after strategic consideration a quick >>>look for eventual tactics would be ever necessary to avoid mishaps. But I do not >>>want to enter in details about this because i suspect that this has already >>>invented or rejected. Could a programmer tell me about this? Did I pick a good >>>idea or just I picked an unfeasible one? >>>fernando
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.