Author: Bob Durrett
Date: 06:54:12 11/20/03
Go up one level in this thread
On November 20, 2003 at 09:27:12, Mathieu Pagé wrote: >On November 20, 2003 at 03:34:54, swaminathan natarajan wrote: > >>Hi >> >>the main problem is that engine-engine matches without opening book plays same >>moves for infinite games when given same time control >> >>i have kept 6 games series >>all the games played shows the same result >>match ends in a 3-3 tie........same moves till endings and insuffiecient >>material in the position >> >>i hope if the book is selected for the engine,the games will not be the same and >>the result may change? > >Yes, you are right, except if both engines take the same opening line again and >again. > >Some sort of opening learning will totaly avoid this behavior since the engines >will try to find a line that will give them something better than a draw. > >Mathieu The idea of using "some sort of opening learning" to cause chess-playing programs to explore new openings in engine-engine matches "without an opening book" is intriguing because it would be very interesting to see what the "engine" might come up with. One reservation, however, is that the choices may not be truly without human influence. It would depend on how the idea is implemented in software. If human programmers were, in effect, making the decisions then the findings would be tainted by the scourge of "the human tendency to err." Perhaps it would be enlightening to review how opening learning is accomplished [implemented in software] in current-day chess programs. My impression was that opening learning is accomplished by adjusting the probability settings in an opening book. It doesn't have to be that way. A programmer could find another way. Hopefully the "real" chess-playing program programmers will comment on how they might implement Mathieu's idea. Bob D.
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.