Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 17:02:35 11/17/03
Go up one level in this thread
On November 17, 2003 at 18:26:10, Torstein Hall wrote: >On November 17, 2003 at 17:52:05, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On November 17, 2003 at 17:35:42, Daniel Clausen wrote: >> >>>While one should be careful when testing engines with only a few positions, I >>>wouldn't be surprised if Crafty would have the very good (if not the best among >>>computers) chances against humans in a similar match. The effort to concentrate >>>very much on games against humans has to pay off after that time. Too bad that a >>>match GK-Crafty is not realistic due to commercial constraints. >>> >>>Sargon >> >> >>I would hesitate to draw conclusions from a couple of positions. The >>entire game has to be played. I certainly feel that the commercial >>programs are better-tuned overall, even though Crafty will clearly have >>a right idea here and there that others don't.. > >Is it really a matter of tuning? I feel this kind of closed positions demand a >plan. I can not see how the approach of todays programs can achieve this. >Or maybee I'm wrong and a very advanced position evaluation could make a program >play this closed positions right? > >Torstein I think the idea of "don't block, or unblock if blocked" _is_ a plan of sorts. Which means, in the case of my stuff, that it is really a back-door "plan" in that context. Whether that is the human definition of a plan or not really doesn't matter since humans don't play chess the same way as a computer anyway...
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.