Author: Tord Romstad
Date: 10:11:35 01/14/04
Go up one level in this thread
On January 14, 2004 at 12:51:32, Peter Fendrich wrote: >Of course it can be random fluctuations but i have run several matches with and >without learning. I can tell you that aggressive learning vs an opponent with a >tiny book will eventually crush that opponent. The same goes if the opponent >have a bad book. It makes a big difference quickly. Aggressive learning vs an >opponent with a good big wide and "bushy" book is not at all that effective. Gothmog's book can best be described as "bad, wide and bushy". It plays almost everything, including openings it doesn't understands at all (I really hate to see it play the Benko gambit). >It can even be the other way around you will "overlearn" unimportant things. Less >aggressive learning is better in that case and it will then take a longer time >before you see any results from the learning. >I have no idea what kind of learning Phalanx is using. Neither have I. I have just started another 100-game match on the PIV 2.4 GHz, this time with learning enabled for Phalanx. Gothmog won the first two games. Thanks to you and everybody else for the answers! Tord
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.