Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Evaluation Autotuning

Author: Robert Hyatt

Date: 12:25:31 06/28/04

Go up one level in this thread


On June 28, 2004 at 14:20:29, Joachim Rang 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....
>
>I don't think so, the randomness of tactical shots which is certainly present in
>short time controls will be distributed according to the strength of the search
>_and_ evaluation of the engines. I see no reason to believe that on shorter time
>controls _random_ luch should play a significant role.
>
>regards Joachim


By definition, "tactics" has nothing to do with "evaluation".  Tactics is
discovered by the search.  Shallow searches overlook too much...




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.