Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 15:32:24 01/04/99
Go up one level in this thread
On January 04, 1999 at 17:53:03, Peter Fendrich wrote: >As I understood it, you are looking for tactical mistakes in the "complete" >opening theory. Am i right? Depends on what you mean by "complete". We took the 500 standard openings, which generate 4,038 unique positions and analyzed those at 12 minutes of PII 300Mhz time per position (all analysis performed at least twice). Of course, there are many popular varyations not covered in those standard positions. >In that case: >Have you find any? There are lots of them [depending on refutations not being refuted, of course] ;-) Since this analysis is clearly fairly superficial, the most interesting part will be in the large ce evaluations. For instance, gambit openings are quite likely to show a score of +/- 100 centipawns for obvious reasons. For openings like this, I would not be nearly as concerned about the centipawn score as the win/loss percentage and how some of the greats have played it. But for positions which have a ce greater than 2 the results are quite interesting. After enough data is gathered, I will be able to perform simulated annealing on the database. At that time, I expect the value of analysis to improve exponentially. At any rate, it should be a fun exercise to collect the positions and compare the program suggested move with the standard move(s) taken from that position. There may be a few gems in the alternate evals as well. I also am rerunning every ECO position at 8 hrs/position, starting with the largest ce in absolute value and working towards those with 0 ce. I expect this work to have far less value than the simulated annealing. Still, being 40 times longer than our standard analyis it should always give one more, and occasionally two more plies. Some positions that had very large ce evaluations were "healed" to smaller values after lengthy analysis (and some became even larger). I think the biggest surprise (to me) is the large number of very large ce evaluations in standard openings. I would think that (other than the two 'fools-mate' sort of openings) one would see very evenly matched conditions at the completion of formation for a standard opening.
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.