Author: jonathan Baxter
Date: 15:11:11 10/02/98
Go up one level in this thread
On October 02, 1998 at 10:48:46, James Robertson wrote: >On October 01, 1998 at 20:28:55, jonathan Baxter wrote: > >[snip] >> >>Currently I am working on an improved version of KnightCap, with better >>search and a much *simpler* evaluation function. Interesting preliminary results >>show that with parameter learning and *just* piece/square tables we can get >>a rating of around 2500 on ICC. This is without any opening learning (the >>original version of KnightCap has an opening learning algorithm that is also >>described in the above paper.) >[snip] > >I don't think just piece/square tables are good enough for a program at all, >even with parameter learning. For instance, how does it avoid making stupid >doublings and isolations of it's pawns? My program without doubling and >isolation penalties makes very bad choices about pawn structure, often >sufficient to lose. Obviously your program is good enough tactically to win most >games, but I think that it will do much worse against human opposition without >the extra knowledge. This performance id against all-comers on ICC, not just computers. But your point is perfectly valid---higher order pawn features cannot be represented. What surprised me was how well you can do (in particular against humans) with just piece/square tables. It seems that tactics counts for an *awful* lot in chess. Cheers, Jonathan Baxter
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.