Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 15:54:26 08/12/03
Go up one level in this thread
On August 12, 2003 at 04:58:45, Uri Blass wrote: >On August 12, 2003 at 04:39:36, martin fierz wrote: > >>On August 11, 2003 at 20:51:54, ludicrous wrote: >> >>>A little bit off topic, but I'd like to know if there is a SSDF-like list for >>>Checkers Programs? I've heard of KINGSROW and it seems to be the Ruffian >>>equivalent of Checkers. >>> >>>Which is the strongest? >>> >>>What is the rating systems used in Checkers? >> >>there is no SSDF-like list for checkers programs. there are a couple of strong >>checkers programs out there, all are by far good enough to beat any human. there >>are two strong free programs, you should check out these first; kingsrow and >>cake "sans souci" for the checkerboard interface. >> >>the strongest commercial engine is nemesis, which won the computer world >>championship in front of kingsrow and cake in august 2002, but with a very >>narrow margin. i don't think it is any better than the improved 8pc versions of >>kingsrow and cake which have been published after the championship - nemesis was >>never updated since then. >> >>the chinook team has completed the 10pc endgame database early this year, and >>with that, chinook will be the strongest program there is. > >How do you know it? > >the fact that a program has more tablebases does not mean automatically that it >is stronger. It does when you know that most all searches now end up in the endgame tables. :) IE the hit percentage was horribly high after the 9 piece files were done. I think Jonathan claimed 70% of the _first_ searches done reached the tables for perfect scores. That obviously just went up a good bit... > >Without testing it is impossible to know. > >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.