Author: Joachim Rang
Date: 11:22:55 06/28/04
Go up one level in this thread
On June 28, 2004 at 13:03:37, Dan Honeycutt wrote: >On June 28, 2004 at 12:43:10, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On June 28, 2004 at 12:37:42, Dan Honeycutt wrote: >> >>>On June 28, 2004 at 08:54:00, Anthony Cozzie wrote: >>> >>> >>>>settings, and then N games with the new settings. I am only really interested >>>>in longer timecontrols: 20 min + on an Athlon 2.0G or so (70 min on P-650, etc), >>> >>> >>>Why long time controls? I thought you could test evaluation with shorter time >>>controls, search needed longer (or varied) time controls. Am I out in left >>>field? >>> >>>Dan H. >> >> >>My personal belief is that longer controls are better. Short games rely heavily >>on the search, and leaves a better chance for random luck to influence the >>outcome. Deeper searches tend to make fewer tactical mistakes, leaving the >>outcome to the quality of the evaluation.... > >Makes sense but not what I was hoping to hear. Every bonus/penalty in my >evaluation is a pure guess. I need to tune, but the task is formidable. With >limited time and resources I was hoping to use shorter time controls. > >Hopefully this project of Anthony and yours will produce something to help those >like me. I'll be watching developments with interest. > >Dan H. May personal experience with tuning the evaluation of Fruit is, that short time controls like 2+1 are appropriate for such a task. One needs statistical significance and that is achievable only with short time controls in a reasonable time. regards Joachim
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.