Author: Uri Blass
Date: 02:48:29 07/16/04
Go up one level in this thread
On July 16, 2004 at 05:42:09, Uri Blass wrote: >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 To be more correct I first test them by giving the program some positions and comparing the evaluation with the evaluation of the previous version and if I see no problem in this test I use games later. 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.