Author: Matthew Hull
Date: 09:35:18 06/01/04
Go up one level in this thread
On June 01, 2004 at 11:50:11, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On June 01, 2004 at 04:10:01, Uri Blass wrote: > >>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. > >In current crafty, you can change weights, or you can change each specific eval >term if you so choose. But using the _Default_ book, which depends on learning >to cull bad lines, and then disabling learning makes no sense whatsoever... > > >> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>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. > >How. I have a bad line in my book. Do I _really_ have to play it multiple >times against each opponent to make a better comparison? Or do I have to take >the time to hand-edit each "learned result" I get so that the book will be as >good as possible??? > > >> >>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. >> > >I don't see why. It introduces random noise into an experiment, repeatedly, >when the program plays an opening it would normally have learned was bad... > > It's like pulling the legs off a bug to measure how fast it's wings flap. They are dismantling the chess-playing entity known as "crafty" and measuring one of it's component parts, then claiming the result as the product of how "crafty" plays chess. It is simply "evil". > > >>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.