Author: Heiner Marxen
Date: 13:59:04 06/15/04
Go up one level in this thread
On June 15, 2004 at 16:42:33, David Dahlem wrote: >On June 15, 2004 at 16:39:02, F. Huber wrote: > >>On June 15, 2004 at 16:21:07, David Dahlem wrote: >> >>>On June 15, 2004 at 15:39:26, F. Huber 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 >>>> >>>>Hi Dave, >>>> >>>>a really very good idea! >>>> >>>>(Why? - Because here also ChestUCI could participate ;-)) >>>> >>>>Regards, >>>>Franz. >>> >>>Hi Franz >>> >>>The excellent ChestUCI mate solving could be used to "prove" the solutions, but >>>shouldn't be allowed to compete, since it would blow away the competition. :-) >> >>This will probably depend on the "goal" of this test: >>If it´s only to find _any_ mate (not the shortest one), then Chest would >>would certainly _not_ blow away anyone - >>in this case I would rather guess TheKing or Yace as winner! >> >>Regards, >>Franz. > >I think the "shortest" mate should be the goal. :-) > >Regards >Dave Of course! I second this! :-) :-)) Cheers, Heiner
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.