Author: Landon Rabern
Date: 16:17:58 07/02/03
Go up one level in this thread
On July 02, 2003 at 18:11:30, Matthew White wrote: >On July 02, 2003 at 15:04:12, Andrei Fortuna wrote: > >>On July 02, 2003 at 14:42:36, Matthew White wrote: >> >>>How do you get a program to develop its pieces if you ignore time? Yes, >>>piece-square tables are helpful, but how do you keep a program from chasing a >>>piece that it thinks it can exchange, but which will result in letting the >>>opponent develop his pieces comfortably and start an attack? I realize that we >>>use opening books specifically to avoid having to think about these issues, but >>>sometimes when opening books end early, I have seen engines un-develop a piece >>>that the book just finished developing! >> >>I have seen this kind of behaviour in my Freyr sometimes. It's because it >>doesn't understand the spirit of the position it finds itself when exiting the >>opening book and panics. >> >>Quickest answer would be opening books and piece squares. >>Might work giving a small penalty for undeveloped pieces for the first 10 moves >>(as a Master friend advised me) but this "first 10 moves" thing is tricky >>because after that you have to clear the hashtable as the rules have slightly >>changed and you do not want to find hashentries scored by old rules. >> >>A refinement would be to select opening book lines suited to the playing style >>of your program but that takes lots of work and it needs a very strong player >>with opening knowledge. >> >>Without opening book and piecesquares I guess a set of rules would have to be >>established, all centered on developing the pieces to good squares. >> >>How do you define tempi in a chess program ? I am not sure how I could do that >>programatically speaking). >> >>Andrei > >Defining tempi is a very difficult question... I am not exactly sure how to do >it. The only straightforward way that I can think of doing it in an opening is >to count the number of pieces that have been moved from their original squares >(or the number of moves remaining to connect the rooks), and to do the same for >the opponent. The difference is the time advantage/disadvantage. I believe that >most programs ignore time as a factor, but I could be wrong. I think it would be >a big step towards improving opening play if we could figure out a way to >incorporate tempo, though... > >Matt Betsy tries to use a similar measure of tempi in the opening. The advantage is exponential ( 3 tempi is worth about 9 times as much as 1 tempi which is worth a centipawn). I really want to play with this more now and I wish I had VC++ here. Landon
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.