Author: Torstein Hall
Date: 06:45:25 07/16/04
Go up one level in this thread
On July 16, 2004 at 07:08:52, Steve Coladonato wrote: >I tend to agree with you and have posted previously on this subject. The book >is human not engine. You will see comments about the recent WCCC match and see >where so and so had an inferior position out of book. The book is part of the program, as much as the engine! The top programmers try to make the book fit the program, so that the prog. do not end up in postions where it dont have a clue. >I have suggested in the past that to truly test the engine, the books should be >the same and even suggested a book depth of between 12 and 20 moves (24-40 ply). > In the past, before Shredder was Chessbase, I felt that Stefan Meyer-Kahlen's >algorithms or heuristics were a bit better than the competition (I haven't >followed Shredder very much since it was acquired). > >Today, I believe the improvements in the performance of the engines is mainly >attributed to the hardware not anything the programmers have done. The AI >engine that Steve Edwards is working on has perked my interest. In that respect I believe you are wrong also. I'm quite sure that you will get better results for newer program if you match them on similar hardware. I have not had a look at SSDF list resently, but as far as I remember you find a very high correlation between newer program and higher on the list! Torstein > >Steve
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.