Author: Mike S.
Date: 12:14:16 05/23/04
Go up one level in this thread
On May 23, 2004 at 14:59:47, Jouni Uski wrote: >... which one? Let's say simply, that you must decide if new mystery engine X is >good or bad without playing single game! Is it public test suite or have You >your own? At least WAC and ECM are totally useless... While I'm aware that the tactical speed is only a part of an engine's strength profile, I trust my own Quicktest tactical testsuite for a *quick first estimation, if an engine could be among the tops or not* (not drawing much more conclusions from it though). http://members.aon.at/computerschach/quick/quicke.htm I think, from all elements an engine's strength consists of, the tactical strength is the most significant still (for a rough estimation), because as I see it the quality of the search is directly related to it. In addition to this, a very interesting new engine would have to show me it's performance in various similar positions like those in the QT., but which aren't published as a collection (I'm constantly collecting such positions). So I would be able to spot a "tricky" engine which has learned the QT. solutions, although I would of course never expect that somebody does such dirty things! :-) But if a software publisher would ask me to do a beta test and/or give an estimation of a new engine, I would use various larger testsuites, comparing the results with those of known strong engines. I think the NACCA collection is one of the best to choose from: http://homepage.mac.com/chessnotation/TSD.html (A sidenote: Unfortunately this NACCA plan and website is discontinued? I read nothing new lately. Anyway, I hope the TSD resource remains online. It's good!) Regards, M.Scheidl
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.