Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Thinker 4.6b third after 1st round!

Author: Uri Blass

Date: 01:10:01 06/01/04

Go up one level in this thread


On May 31, 2004 at 18:33:30, Robert Hyatt wrote:

>On May 31, 2004 at 18:29:09, Matthias Gemuh wrote:
>
>>On May 31, 2004 at 15:08:51, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>
>>>On May 31, 2004 at 13:41:39, Miroslav Nikolic wrote:
>>>
>>>>Hardware: PIII 800MHz, 256Mb RAM
>>>>OS: Windows Xp
>>>>GUI: Chessprogram8 (Fritz 8)
>>>>Tournament: 10x8x40min, round robin, 8 rounds
>>>>Time control: 40'/40, 40'/40 + 40' (rest)
>>>>Hash: 32 MB
>>>>Ponder: off
>>>>Resign: on
>>>>Tablebase: Nalimov 4-pieces
>>>>TB Cache : 6 MB
>>>>Book used: DeepFritz7.ctg for Deep Fritz, H8 for Hiarcs, Select.ctg (by me)
>>>>for others
>>>>Book learning: off
>>>
>>>
>>>Just a question:  Why would you want to turn off a part of a chess program that
>>>is not easy to develop in the first place?  IE book learning is a part of many
>>>engines.  Turning it off makes no sense to me... any more than turning off
>>>passed pawn evaluation or selective search capabilities...

I think that it is better if programmers enable also option to turn off passed
pawns evaluation and other parameters.

In the last version of movei that I still did not release the user can change
the passed pawn evaluation by changing weights including disabling them if you
change the relevant weights to 0.

I will not be surprised if it is possible to find a better personality by
changing weights.

>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Strange logic !
>>How can one compare book learning with passed pawn evaluation or selective
>>search ?
>
>Very simple.
>
>1.  I added passed pawn logic to address weaknesses that needed help, in
>Crafty's particular playing style.
>
>2.  I _specifically_ designed the opening book around book learning.  I have
>_no_ hand-tailored lines, my book is made by sucking in reams of PGN data and
>then relying on learning to discover which lines are bad or unplayable.
>
>Is this hard to understand?  If I had a hand-customized book, I wouldn't care,
>but I don't, and turning off the learning facility simply makes _zero_ sense...
>
>>To make sure that the outcome of a tournament does not depend on order
>>of opponents, book learning has to be switched off.
>
>
>That's nonsense.  Does a human have to do a "brain purge" between opponents?

We cannot do it with humans but we can do it with engines and it makes better
comparison.

If you want to compare between different versions when the change is only in the
evaluation then learning add varaible that is not relevant and it is better to
compare results when learning is off.

Uri



This page took 0.01 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.