Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 11:59:34 06/02/04
Go up one level in this thread
On June 02, 2004 at 14:08:44, Dan Honeycutt wrote: >On June 02, 2004 at 12:23:29, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On June 02, 2004 at 06:48:03, Vasik Rajlich wrote: >> >[snip] > >>>frosting on the cake. >>> >>>For an amateur engine though, it's just a distraction. We have enough of those >>>as it is. The various zero-cost solutions are totally sufficient. >> >> >>What is a "zero cost solution" to the book problem? I've been working on a >>chess program since 1968. I have _never_ found a "zero cost solution" to the >>book problem. My current effort is the closest there can be, because once I >>wrote the code (which did not take months of effort by the way) it began to >>manage its own book, freeing me from that responsibility. Net gain in >>productivity was very large. If you don't learn, you either hand-tune or get >>killed. The former is a huge time drain, the latter is unpleasant. :) >> >>I have published a paper in the JICCA explaining _exactly_ how I did learning. >>So you don't have to start from scratch, which I did. And even from scratch it >>was hardly a huge effort. The complete learning code in crafty, book and >>position, importing, exporting, everything is 1200 lines of C with plenty of >>comments. It isn't _that_ hard to do... >> >>I'm sure that if I could do it, anyone could do it... >> >> >> >>> >>>Just my 2 cents of course ... >>> >>>Vas > >I think Vas was talking to me, not you. A (near) zero-cost solution is to get a >collection of high quality games, grind those into a book and let the engine >play move so-and-so the same percent of the time as played in the games >collection. Your engine prefers 1 d4 over 1 e4. Mine has too little experience >to know what it prefers. > >Dan H. trust me, that will _not_ work. All of us using automatically-generated books have tried that, and found it _severely_ wanting. What happens when move X is played in thousands of games, until someone busts the line with new analysis. You lose that game every time you play it. That's a killer. Learning solves it cleanly. The better your initial book, the better your program will perform, but learning _still_ cleans up all the things that the book screws up for one reason or another.
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.