Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: endgame eval question

Author: Peter McKenzie

Date: 20:31:31 11/25/98

Go up one level in this thread


On November 25, 1998 at 18:32:27, Jon Dart wrote:

>In a recent game, my program (White) reached this position:
>
>5b2/5P2/p7/5P2/P7/2k5/8/1K6/ w
>
>White is a pawn down and the passer is firmly blocked. A
>little search will reveal that White is going to lose the
>advanced pawns. But I am curious about Crafty's eval here
>(this is crafty 15.18):
>
>White(1): setboard 5b2/5P2/p7/5P2/P7/2k5/8/1K6/ w
>White(1): score
>end-game phase
>              clearing hash tables
>note: scores are for the white side
>material evaluation.................  -1.00
>development.........................   0.00
>pawn evaluation.....................   0.55
>passed pawn evaluation..............  -0.10
>passed pawn race evaluation.........   0.00
>interactive piece evaluation........  -1.40
>total evaluation....................  -1.95
>White(1): execution complete.
>
>I don't really see how the passed pawn eval
>gets to be negative, or where the "interactive

Yeah, thats kind of weird.  Guess there is a big penalty for the pawns
being blocked.

>piece evaluation" gets to be -1.40. Clearly
>Crafty realizes statically that White is in
>trouble here, but I'm having difficulty looking
>at the source and seeing what eval terms are
>kicking in.
>
>Also, I'd be interested to see what score other
>programs give here.

LambChop gives a static evaluation of -0.39 pawns for this position, the white
passed pawns help the white eval.  I think this score should be more favourable
for black, but I'm not penalising white for having blocked passed pawns.  On the
other hand, I'm giving the white bishop's mobility a big bonus...

What was Arasan's static eval?

>
>--Jon

Peter



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.