Author: margolies,marc
Date: 22:44:57 07/02/03
Go up one level in this thread
Why not use some sort of STEP function triggerred by sets of 3 tempi? When the step is greater than 1, say, an engine that had 'solid' parameters could be reset to attack. I don't get the exponential/logarythmic idea in Betsy. This is a good beginning but perhaps it skews values too much. On July 02, 2003 at 19:17:58, Landon Rabern wrote: >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 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.