Author: Drexel,Michael
Date: 01:58:59 04/27/03
Go up one level in this thread
On April 26, 2003 at 20:18:23, Uri Blass wrote: >On April 26, 2003 at 19:15:04, Drexel,Michael wrote: > >>Today I started an interesting experiment. >>A match Chessmaster 9000 against Shredder 7.04 in Chessbase GUI with >>over-optimistically settings for The King 3.23. >>With this settings The King engine evaluates his positions almost always as >>better for himself, except it is completely lost. >> >>Surprisingly a 30 game match ended: >>Chessmaster 9000 - Shredder 7.04: 15.5-14.5 (+12 =7 -11) >>5 min, AMD 2200+, ponder off, Remis.ctg, alternate colours >> >>I told The King that the own qeen is better than the opponents qeen, the own >>rooks are better than the opponent rooks, the own bishops are better than the >>opponent bishops and so on... >> >>Its over-optimistically evaluations dont hurt at all. >> >>The evaluations were way off but it nevertheless won the match and played a lot >>of exciting games although it lacks resistance in worse positions. >>Chessmaster played very strong in positions it had an advantage. >> >>Therefore I think it should be a good idea to have completely different >>evaluations. >>For clearly better positions an optimistically evaluation (Shredder obviously >>has very high scores in such positions) and for worse positions a more realistic >>evaluation. > >What is your definition os optimistically evaluation >If you multiply the score by 2 when you have a clear advanatage then you also >can describe it as an optimistically evaluation when you have a clearly better >position. Slightly better scores for own material and most important: High scores for positional factors (Mobility for example). Sometimes there is in fact no real compensation for the material and the programs lose badly (a pawn or an exchange down in the endgame) but this seems to work very often. > >Deciding to evaluate your pieces as more than the opponent pieces can help only >if without it you may trade to drawn endgame but in that case the problem is bad >evaluation of endgames. > >If chessmaster is relatively bad endgame player then the idea of evaluating it's >pieces as more than the opponents in better positions may be productive for it >but not every program is relatively weak in the endgame. > >Uri
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.