Author: Dave Gomboc
Date: 22:21:45 10/04/03
Go up one level in this thread
On October 03, 2003 at 23:08:25, Christophe Theron wrote: >On October 03, 2003 at 18:21:33, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On October 03, 2003 at 17:34:56, Christophe Theron wrote: >> >>>On October 03, 2003 at 15:36:22, Mridul Muralidharan wrote: >>> >>>> >>>>You misinterpreted me. >>>> >>>>On October 03, 2003 at 14:51:24, Uri Blass wrote: >>>> >>>>>On October 03, 2003 at 13:38:54, Mridul Muralidharan wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> I was a bit taken aback by these declarations : >>>>>> >>>>>>On October 03, 2003 at 12:47:23, Uri Blass wrote: >>>>>>>I prefer even not to care about using hash tables for pruning because my >>>>>>>experience told me that I cannot get significant gain there easily >>>>>> >>>>>>Hash table not giving you pruning ? I suspect a bug in your hashkey - >>>>>>nothingelse. >>>>>>Or maybe it is the easily that is operative word ? >>>>>>I think there are a lot of open source programs that you can refer to and >>>>>>correct your bugs with - crafty , GNUChess , etc , etc. >>>>>>Might help to get this right. >>>>> >>>>>I do not like to copy from other sources. >>>>>I found that instability helped me to do my program significantly better. >>>>> >>>>>If I delete it in order to be able to copy from other programs then I may need >>>>>to start by doing it significantly weaker. >>>>> >>>> >>>>I did not mean - "copy" here. >>>>Rome was not built in a day. What I meant is : >>>>Look at their implementation - check yours. Find any obvious bugs. >>>>I seriously suspect that there are - since hashtables not only help in pruning , >>>>but massively help in move ordering. >>>>If you can afford to make these statements - then your impl is horribly full of >>>>bugs. >>>> >>>>As far as "instability helping" - I'm really not sure what you mean by this. As >>>>far as I know - everyone , including me , tries to reduce instability so that >>>>search is more stable requiring minimal search tree. >>>>Wild extensions , unstable pruning , etc may help you in solving test suites >>>>better and faster - but in real world games , it will suck badly. >>>> >>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>(I have a lot >>>>>>>of stuff that means that pruning or extension is not defined only by the >>>>>>>position). >>>>>> >>>>>>Where ever possible , I try to make the search behaviour as relevent to the >>>>>>current position as possible and not rely on past search. >>>>>>Why do you want to do the opposite ? >>>>> >>>>>because the opposite gives me some advantages. >>>> >>>>test , test , test - dont assume. >>>>like my collegue says : When you AssUMe , you make an Ass of U and Me ;) >>>> >>>>>Movei has its chances against every program inspite of having bad order of moves >>>>>and bad extensions and bad pruning. >>>>> >>>> >>>>acceptance is the first step to improvement ! >>>> >>>>>I believe that I can get above Crafty level if I improve order of move >>>>>extensions,pruning and evaluation. >>>>> >>>>>Movei already has its chances against Crafty but today crafty is significantly >>>>>better. >>>>> >>>>>There is a lot to improve and the main problem is programming. >>>>> >>>>>Uri >>>> >>>> >>>>AFAIK movei is not smp - so no point in saying search here :) >>>>SO , other than move ordering , eval and pruning : what else is left ? interface >>>>code ? ;) >>>>anyone can get to crafty level or higher - IF you are willing to put in the >>>>effort and scientifically research. >>>>All the best - wishing to see a better Movei and a more scientific Uri :) >>> >>> >>> >>>You are talking without knowing Uri, obviously. >>> >>>You are also talking about commputer chess without really knowing, I fear. >>> >>>Uri has been talking with us about chess programs for a long time without >>>writing one. So at the begining he came with ideas that were not really >>>relevant, or not exactly to the point. >>> >>>What I like about Uri is that at some point instead of keeping talking about the >>>subject he has started to write his own chess program. I also know that he has a >>>very scientific, objective approach in what he does. >>> >>>So if I was you I would not give Uri beginners's advices like "test, test - >>>don't assume". Because as far as I know that's exactly what he is doing. >>> >>>I also believe that Uri is right in not trying to get too much inspiration from >>>other chess programs. >>> >>>I think you should refrain from giving lame advices to Uri and tell us instead >>>about your achievements as a chess programmer. >>> >>> >>> >>> Christophe >> >>Thanks for the support. >>I believe that I did not implement most of the ideas that I had before writing a >>chess program. >> >>There are things that I did not try not because I believe that they are not >>productive but because they are not simple to implement and I prefer to think >>about implementing more simple things first. >> >>About testing I can say that in a lot of cases I am not sure if the program is >>better after a change that I accept but at least I am sure that it is not >>significantly worse. >> >>Uri > > > >I'm confident Movei will reach a very good level. In any case I give you credits >for starting your work on a real chess program. The experience you gain from >this immediately puts you above those who have never tried but keep talking, or >in some cases allow themselves to criticize. > > > > Christophe Heh, I guess you leapfrogged me, Uri. ;-) Dave
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.