Author: Omid David Tabibi
Date: 06:26:24 12/14/03
Go up one level in this thread
On December 14, 2003 at 09:18:21, Uri Blass wrote: >On December 14, 2003 at 09:01:26, Omid David Tabibi wrote: > >>On December 14, 2003 at 08:34:31, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On December 14, 2003 at 08:10:43, Omid David Tabibi wrote: >>> >>>>On December 14, 2003 at 07:58:41, Uri Blass wrote: >>>> >>>>>On December 14, 2003 at 06:00:10, Tord Romstad wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On December 13, 2003 at 19:18:58, Omid David Tabibi wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On December 13, 2003 at 04:26:16, Tord Romstad wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>The easiest solution to this is to spend another afternoon on adding opening >>>>>>>>book >>>>>>>>code to the engine. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>How exactly, if you don't know anything about the format (ctg) you are going to >>>>>>>code for?! >>>>>> >>>>>>Why is it so important to use exactly the same book? Just do like almost >>>>>>everybody >>>>>>else, and build a book from a PGN database. >>>>>> >>>>>>Tord >>>>> >>>>>I do not know how almost everybody does it. >>>>>Did you look first in free source code like book.c of crafty to understand how >>>>>other do it? >>>> >>>>Most programmers don't get into the hassle of writing their own book format. >>>>Instead, the time is better spent improving the automatically generated book in >>>>one of the common formats. >>> >>>I believe that most of the opponent of movei in Leo's tournament use their own >>>book format but I may be wrong. >> >>I was referring to most programmers in WCCC. At least half the participants were >>using CTG or BOK formats. >> >>Leo's tournament is in WinBoard, which does not have any book support. > >I know but the number of programs that participate in Leo's tournament is >clearly bigger. > >I simply get testing time for my program thanks to the fact that I support >winboard so I have more motivation to care about having book under winboard and >not to care about having book under Fritz > > >> >> >> >>> >>>I believe that using an existing format is wrong because it means that I have no >>>freedom to change the book dependent on the time control. >>> >>>I believe that it is better to have a bigger book for blitz when the logic is >>>that at longer time control I expect the engine to find more often by itself >>>better moves when in blitz it may be better to trust some known alternative that >>>was not played a lot. >> >>You can create several books, or set the interface to play a larger subset of >>opening moves. > >I understand but I do not like to be dependent on interface and I have less >freedom by doing it. > >I also think about not playing automatically book moves in 0 seconds(except >moves that were checked manually) in order to avoid stupid blunders that I have >bad luck to have in the pgn file and to use 1/10 of the normal time to calculate >to see if I can trust the book. If you want to avoid book mistakes do the following: Take a pgn database of 2500+ rated players, and set the play threshold to 4 games, and 2 wins at least. It is very unlikely that a move played by 4 strong players is a "stupid blunder", especially if it results in a victory in 2 of them. But I think that using such a high quality database, 1 win out of 2 (or 3) is a better practical value than 2 out of 4. > >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.