Author: martin fierz
Date: 05:21:41 02/18/04
Go up one level in this thread
On February 18, 2004 at 05:37:41, Tord Romstad wrote: >On February 17, 2004 at 20:55:13, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>Here's a dumb idea: >> >>Write a program to scan a Nalimov database, but throw away everything except >>won/lost/drawn/broken (needs 2 bits per reflected board position to store the >>outcome state). >> >>Then write a table. > >There are two problems with following this approach: > >1. If you just use a table, you risk to miss the opportunity to discover > principles which can be useful even in more complicated endgames. i concur. i think the most important aspect of thinking up rules for simple endgames is a possible generalization for slightly more complex endings. already all 5-men TBs are several GB IIRC, and 6-men TBs are much larger. most KRP-KR endings were once KRPP-KRP endings before the last pair of pawns was exchanged - so if you have sensible rules for KRPP-KRP, you should do much better than a program which only uses TBs. cheers martin >2. The memory requirements are big. A few MBs of RAM may not seem like a > lot on modern computers, but it is not very aesthetically pleasing to > use so much memory in order to do something as simple as evaluating > KRKP endgames. Besides, some of us (or at least one of us) want to > port our engines to Palm OS and similar platforms, where memory is > limited. > >Tord
This page took 0.01 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 07 Jul 11 08:48:38 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.