Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 15:54:59 05/11/04
Go up one level in this thread
On May 11, 2004 at 18:20:10, Uri Blass wrote: >On May 11, 2004 at 18:12:48, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>On May 11, 2004 at 03:01:10, Uri Blass wrote: >>[snip] >>>I do not understand this evaluation because it seems to contradict the pv. >>> >>>List plans to allow Crafty repetition of the root position if you change >>>Crafty's Nf6e4 that is written in the pv to Qc7b7 but still evaluates the >>>position as positive for itself. >>> >>>I think that the evaluation should be at most 0.00 if the opponent can force >>>repetition of the root position against your plan. >> >>Beyond the first few plies, a pv is a wild guess. Beyond the stated search >>depth, a pv is wild speculation (often based on SEE). It is not unusual to see >>a pv by a top chess program have a checkmate sign in it, and have the score >>nowhere close to a checkmate. > >It can never happen with movei unless I have a bug. >checkmate is always evaluated as checkmate in movei. > >In the relevant case of List-Crafty the repetition can happen in the 4th ply of >the pv and it is not a horizon effect. > >It is possible that list read the pv from the hash and it is wrong but it is >clear that 4 plies should be enough to see a draw for crafty in that line so the >fact that list has positive score in the game is clearly wrong. Tt is probably intentional. A tiny ce value in your favor in a known draw position when you would otherwise have some small advantage is a common ploy when you hope that the opponent might make a mistake. Similarly for when you have a small disadvantage.
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.