Author: Amir Ban
Date: 17:23:39 02/27/03
Go up one level in this thread
On February 26, 2003 at 18:48:53, Stephen Ham wrote: >Thanks, > >Dann, Uri, and Robin! I think I understood all of that. That was very helpful. >Again, I'm know next to nothing about chess engine programing, so I assumed that >the evaluation function guided the search function. I don't know why I assumend >that...I just did. > Of course the evaluation guides the search. Since you got here various answers that basically say evaluation is not that important I will add a view that strongly disagrees. Getting evaluation right is the most important thing for a program to do in a position. Under-evaluation will often lead to playing weak moves, but over-evaluation is almost always fatal against an opponent who has the right assessment. Amir >Yes, Shredder's evaluations are very "optimistic", Robin. I was surprised to see >how it enjoyed the White side of the Smith-Morra Gambit, while other engines >naturally prefer Black's extra pawn. Perhaps the latest Junior is similarly >"optimistic." I hope that SMK prepares Shredder 8 with less optimistic >evaluations in order to try to match reality. > >It seems too from my review of chess engines in positions resulting from >Ham-Nimzo 7.32 (please see my review), that certain closed pawn formations >absolutely baffle the latest chess engines. I've read that Hiarcs 8 is one of >the most heavily "knowledge" laden chess engines. So I hope that somebody would >test Hiarcs 8 on those same positions from my correspondence games. > >All the best, > >Stephen
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.