Author: Harald Faber
Date: 05:32:39 12/23/98
Go up one level in this thread
On December 23, 1998 at 08:23:33, Nouveau wrote: >>>difference), so why not trying another type of tournament ? >>> >>>Chess programs have different styles : they don't treat positions the same way, >>>they don't "understand" chess the same way, so why not thematic tournaments ? >>> >>>For example, how do they deal with the Ruy Lopez ? Which one is the best >>>Scottish player ? Which one defends best against the King's gambit ? >>> >>>I'm sure we could have interesting results. The point is not to have another war >>>about strength, but to have a better idea of the way computer chess programs >>>deal with different type of positions : it is a very rare subject here. >> >>This reminds me on the Nunn test which indeed is a thematic test. 10 (equal) >>opening positions are taken out of the opening theory. >>Indeed some try to test strength with this test... > >I understand the Nunn test as a "engine without opening library" test : it's a >try to compare relative strength of engines. I think it's a good point to >evaluate "pure" strength. > >That's not the direction I thought. The idea is to look at the way programs deal >with different openings : some are complex, others positional or strategic, and, >for the games I looked at, different programs have completly different evals for >these positions. The Nunn test has different openings. Could you specify your idea where the difference is? >Besides it would be interesting, for me (am I alone in the case ?) to know which >programs play better (understand better ?) the King's gambit, the Schliemann >gambit of the Ruy Lopez or the Fajarowicz gambit. Other may be interested in the >Sicilian Dragon or the Giucco Piano. I'm sure we would find great difference >between programs of a generally same strength. I am sure but that is what opening book responsibles for commercial chess progs do. They try to find out which openings are bad and which are good for the program. >I read once (was it you ?) that the French is a bad opening choice for computers >maybe could we find one that has better results than others with this defense >? Such a difference will always be found in each opening. But I think French and Kings Indian are 2 openings that won't be played well at least for the next 5 years.
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.