Author: Jonas Bylund
Date: 04:50:23 08/03/03
Go up one level in this thread
On August 03, 2003 at 07:22:47, Thorsten Czub wrote: >On August 03, 2003 at 06:37:45, Jonas Bylund wrote: >>The point of Emerson Tan which i find interesting, is that for very long >>analysis it would be nice to have a version of program X (besides the default >>.exe, .eng etc) that has as much knowledge as could possibly be squeezed into >>program X (which in this case could be Rebel, but any srtong engine would do >>really). Now this would hurt it's performance in fast games, but what about say >>3 days per move or more? >> >>Jonas > >the knowledge in programs is often wrong implemented and programmers >don't know that the algorithm is not working as it should. > >often different parts of knowledge wipe out each other, so that putting >3 very good ideas altogether makes the program losing. > >i doubt that it would make much sense to switch anything on you have. >the right tuning is the important thing IMO. > >if you switch anything ON, the program would IMO play weaker as it is in >default. You have to remember that i am talking about a completely different timecontrol than what most testing is based on (standard, rapid and blitz). I am talking about x days per move and that is not (to my knowledge) what most engines are tuned for. Therefore there is not much we can do to guess the outcome of adding more knowledge at LONG time controls, it has to be put to the test, in other words: practical play will either support adding more knowledge at x days per move or the opposite. Jonas
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.