Author: Uri Blass
Date: 02:42:09 07/16/04
Go up one level in this thread
On July 16, 2004 at 04:53:44, Gerd Isenberg wrote: ><snip> >>I think that it is important to test and the problem of some participants is >>lack of testing. >> >>I talked with Gerd(programmer of Icichess) >>Gerd is not a strong chess player. >> > >My german DWZ was slighty above 1600. I think that this level is not what Amir Ban meant by using the words:"strong chess player" inspite of the fact that it may be better than Amir. I do not say that you are a weak chess player but a lot of programmers are at least in your level in playing chess. I guess that the only programmers who are strong chess players in WCCC are Jonny and Vincent(I do not include myself because I am significantly weaker than Jonny). > >>His program is even slower searcher than movei in nodes per second and >>the programmer told me that most of the time is used on the evaluation. >> > >See latest ICGA Journal, "The Tenth Commandment", Review of Dap Hartmann of >"Advances in Computer Games 10", Chapter about Lines of Action, YL versus MONA: > >"If you are slow anyway, take advantage of it" > >Or for IsiChess, if you do expensive king eval, why not looking for static >mates? The main question is if being slow means that you can add knowledge with smaller price. I can give a logical reason why not but I know almost nothing about computers so I may be wrong. If you have a small evaluation then your program can use fast memory to do something. If you have a big evaluation then you may need to use the slow memory to do the same thing so the relative speed demage from looking for static mate may be the same. If my logic is wrong then what is wrong in it? > >>I asked him if he checked to test if what he added in the evaluation was >>productive and the surprising reply was negative. >> > >I don't do any autoplayer matches between two versions with different eval, >because i am not able to play automaticly ;-( > >During the last two years or so, i added a few more eval terms after i >recognized lack of knowledge in some games IsiChess played in tournaments. >Of course this helps in exactly this kind of positions. Depending on the >generalization and interactions, i don't know exactly whether it improves the >overall performance of the program. > >At least i debug each new eval terms i added ;-) >And i check all kinds of symmetry. > >Gerd I do not do it and the question is also if it is important. I remember that I read that a person who found symmetry bugs did not find changes in the level of the program after he fixed the bugs. I test changes in the evaluation only by games. Uri
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.