Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: perpetual check

Author: Pat King

Date: 04:11:15 04/10/03

Go up one level in this thread


On April 09, 2003 at 10:24:57, Uri Blass wrote:

>On April 09, 2003 at 09:18:37, Pat King wrote:
>
>>On April 08, 2003 at 19:30:24, Robin Smith wrote:
>>
>>>The following position is a rather trivial (for a human) perpetual check.  Why
>>>does it take some programs so long to see it?
>>
>>Most programs use some kind of "contempt" score for draws, so in a materially
>>balanced position, they will reject draw scores, so as to provide active play.
>>In a position like this, they will keep playing to win, having no means to
>>"realize" the truth. Since this logic doesn't cause losses, there is no reason
>>for programmers to spend time making programs smarter in this respect.
>>
>>>Robin
>>
>>Pat
>
>No
>
>Most program use no contempt in analyze mode

Good point. My program doesn't yet make this distinction.

>and the poster did not talk about
>scores of +0.15 that are normal contempt factor but about scores of winning for
>white.

So small? I've been using much larger, >1 pawn. Perhaps I'm missing something on
how contempt is supposed to work.

>
>Uri

Pat



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.