Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 14:04:01 03/12/04
Go up one level in this thread
On March 12, 2004 at 16:39:15, Uri Blass wrote: >On March 12, 2004 at 16:14:50, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On March 12, 2004 at 14:49:28, Steve Maughan wrote: >> >>>Amazing! >>> >>>I'm amazed at Fruit's score. I've downloaded it and it seems like a robust >>>engine but I note that it's quite slow and according to the author has little >>>knowedge above and beyond piece tables. Monarch is my engine. It's nowhere >>>near as strong as Fruit - I'd estimate Fruit is +200 ELO stronger than Monarch. >>>Like Fruit, Monarch also has just piece tables and I believe that Monarch is >>>probably even a little faster than Fruit. Like Fruit Monarch also has Null >>>move, check extensions and hash table (2 probes) i.e. on paper they seem to be >>>close in spec. So the question is what makes Fruit so strong? >>> >>>a) Fewer bugs - quite possible! >>>b) ETC - Monarch doesn't have this - Fruit does >>>c) No PV cut-off's in Fruit >>>d) Better piece square tables >>>e) Combination of b, c & d >>>f) ? >>> >>>Of course another explanation is that Fruit is much more sophisticated than the >>>author claims but I see no reason to think this. >>> >>>Any thoughts? >>> >>>Steve >> >>It has some boolean features. >> >>I understood that it also has some pawn structure evaluation. >> >>Uri > >Note that also for me the result of fruit is very surprising and it shows that >inspite of the fact that I believe that chess is mainly a search based game I >still underestimated search. > >It seems to me now that it is possible to develop a chess program with fruit's >evaluation that is going to be stronger than Crafty of today. As Christophe has often said: "Search is also a form of knowledge."
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.