Author: Stuart Cracraft
Date: 12:41:42 09/03/04
Go up one level in this thread
On September 03, 2004 at 05:08:01, Andrei Fortuna wrote: >This makes me think how funny would be if two engines play, engine A would have >all kinds of those extensions in case of check etc, engine B would have >implemented a good eval function (with many terms regarding positional play) and >in the match engine B leads engine A towards the positions where engine A >discovers those mate attacks and so forth ahead of engine B, but he is on the >losing side due to B's positional play. I think this kind of self-play event and auto-tuning and genetic algorithms in general are under-estimated by the computer chess programmers. Just because good results haven't been generated and there is no easy "elixer" doesn't mean we shouldn't be trying it. Think of the time-savings. Heck, your auto-tune doesn't have to produce Bob Hyatt hand-crafted Crafty evaluation coefficients for terms you have to find and prove first -- but even if you don't produce something other than what you are doing now but saving a lot of time, then you have profited more. Stuart
This page took 0.01 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.