Author: David Dahlem
Date: 14:25:45 06/15/04
Go up one level in this thread
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. A "proven forced mate" problem would consist of a number of "best moves", so to be considered solved, only the shortest mate should be found. Otherwise the engine would be finding moves that are not the "best moves". Does that make sense? :-)
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.