Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Different test suite method?

Author: Dann Corbit

Date: 13:31:22 06/15/04

Go up one level in this thread


On June 15, 2004 at 16:01:50, David Dahlem wrote:

>On June 15, 2004 at 15:56:27, Dann Corbit wrote:
>
>>On June 15, 2004 at 15:45:08, David Dahlem wrote:
>>
>>>On June 15, 2004 at 15:33:41, David Dahlem wrote:
>>>
>>>>One of the problems with the current method of testing engines with test suites
>>>>(e.g. WM-Test) is the problem of proving that the proposed solution move is
>>>>actually the best move, especially with positions of a positional nature.
>>>>Perhaps a new method would avoid this problem, namely a suite of mate positions,
>>>>with known, more easily proven solutions? Time to solution could be the criteria
>>>>by which engines are evaluated.
>>>>
>>>>Just an idea. Any thoughts? Would this work?
>>>>
>>>>Regards
>>>>Dave
>>>
>>>This method would also avoid the problem of engines finding the solution for the
>>>wrong reason. :-)
>>
>>The engine that performs best at these problems will be an engine like Chest,
>>which cannot play chess but can solve mates.
>>
>>When the game is in doubt, is when almost all of the moves are played.  If we
>>tune for the very end, the engines will play well in that phase.  But it is a
>>tiny fraction of the game.
>>
>>There are many checkmate test suites.
>>BWTC springs to mind, as an example.
>
>Not all checkmate problems are from endgames, many checkmates occur in the
>middle game, even in openings. :-)

The ones that occur in the openings are only going to happen to the weakest
players. But they might make an interesting suite anyway.

I was a bit surprised to see that there are 5363 certain mates within the first
5 plies of the game of chess (ignoring transpositions).
ftp://cap.connx.com/pub/chess-engines/new-approach/qmates.epd



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.