Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Disequilibrium schemes

Author: José Carlos

Date: 07:27:21 10/22/03

Go up one level in this thread


On October 22, 2003 at 09:42:50, Gerd Isenberg wrote:

>On October 22, 2003 at 06:30:13, Sergei S. Markoff wrote:
>
>>Hello All!
>>
>>DS - is a term for using some features of classical evaluation that consists of
>>two parts - material and positional.
>>There are a lot of positions in that for one side material evaluation is >0 but
>>positional evaluation is <0 or vice versa. The root of big part of mistakes made
>>by modern engines is underestimating of positional eval because the positional
>>evaluation is constructed of several "atomic" factors. The _sum_ of this factors
>>frequently isn't good positional evaluation (anyway there are a lot of
>>"palliative" methods to avoid this problem like evaluation the relationship
>>between several factors). We can't fully trust positional evaluation and that's
>>why most of modern programs using a small values for a lot of factors.
>>The idea of DS is to use disagreement between positional and material
>>evaluation. There are a lot of ways how to use it. For example we can check
>>nodes in which sum_eval < alpha, but positional eval is large (for example we
>>sacrificed a pawn for attack e.t.c.). For this nodes we can:
>>1. Rebuild quiescence to include checks e.t.c.
>>2. Extend search
>>3. Change eval for the case of losing pawn or quality (trade bishop or knight
>>for rook) for big passed pawn / king attack eval.
>>4. Do assymetric eval.
>>5. Something else?
>>
>>Do you have some ideas in this area?
>>
>>Best wishes,
>>Sergei
>
>Hi Sergei,
>
>very interesting stuff. I'm currently using some feedback from eval to control
>search's behaviour, mainly (leaf node) extensions. Even if huge positional terms
>compensate each other, e.g. passers versus king safety.
>
>May be other search algorithms than alpha-beta are more convenient to handle
>such DS stuff to back it up to the root.
>
>Gerd

  I'm doing something like that in Anubis. The eval determines the "uncertainity
degree" of the position. A highly uncertain position is never pruned, while a
clear position is easily pruned against beta (or other prunning and reductions
stuff I'm experimenting with). I use static threats, king safety, something
similar to DS, and other concepts. For example, a passed pawn in pawn endings
makes a position highly uncertain unless I statically detect it's lost...
  DS, as defined by Sergei, is interesting and can fit very well in my schema. I
will test it.

  José C.



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.