Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Junior 9 Test (40'/40) after 300 games

Author: Harald Faber

Date: 05:51:45 01/01/05

Go up one level in this thread


On January 01, 2005 at 07:46:46, Sandro Necchi wrote:

>On January 01, 2005 at 07:40:58, Harald Faber wrote:
>
>>On December 31, 2004 at 15:21:23, Sandro Necchi wrote:
>>
>>>Again I agree. Some years ago there was no learning/book learning at all and
>>>that was a big missing...which made a big difference with the human players.
>>>Now that we have them we need to improve the learning features and not to turn
>>>them off!
>>
>>
>>There is danger that one might test the best learner.
>
>Yes, but I think a chess program is a chess player and so it should be tested in
>the best mode, suggested by the programmer, and without removing anything.
>The learning feature is part of the program.
>Sandro


True, but for analysis reasons I do not find it acceptable to let the program
play dozens or even hundreds of games to let it learn before I get accurate
results.



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.