Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Are over-optimistically evaluations stronger than realistic evaluati

Author: Charles Worthington

Date: 08:30:08 04/28/03

Go up one level in this thread


That's an interesting question but I have one of my own. Is not the engine's
choice of continuations based soley on its eval of the line? Many times I have
seen Shredder follow its over optimistic evals to a dead draw as white. I would
rather my program know where it really stands and whether or not it has
realistic winning chances. Also...I personally would like to know where it
stands as well. There is nothing quite so frustrating as to have an over
optimistic eval turn on you and bite you. I have seen numerous situations where
The King has an eval of +2 against Deep Fritz's -1 and it RARELY works out in
The Kings favor. It's hard for me to muster faith in an engine that is clueless
about it's own position and it is the one thing that keeps me from giving
Shredder a fair shot at becoming my main engine. Enough times of seeing Fritz
pull the rug out from under my Shredder eval has spooked me I guess. I just do
not see how it is possible to handle a position properly when you cannot even
eval it properly and in fast blitz time controls (3+2), I might also add that
the "optimistic" engines almost always perform more poorly than the well
balanced engines. The truth seems to perform better than the lie in this case.
Of course this discussion is about self-inflicted optimism by tampering with the
parameters so it seems even more extreme. You are taking an already-optimistic
engine and furthering it's optimism. It would likely take many thousands of
games to come to a conclusion as to which works best. Honestly though, I think
that in this case having your program lie to you (and itself) will not prove
beneficial. The program will play better if it has a full understanding of its
actual chances and not imagined ones...Optimism causes the program to
overestimate it's chances and play far too aggressively (ie. unwarranted
sacrifices) in certain positions where caution is warranted. Against a human
this may prove beneficial but against a program firmly grounded in reality it
may prove fatal. So, like in life, I think the truth has to be better than the
lie. And I think that extensive testing of these settings would show that, more
often than not, the lie would come back to bite you.

Sincerely, Charles



This page took 0.01 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.