Author: Michael Henderson
Date: 13:50:46 01/23/05
Go up one level in this thread
On January 22, 2005 at 23:58:03, Gordon Rattray wrote: >Hi, > >What is regarded as state-of-the-art for the auto-annotation of a chess game? I >believe that in the past Fritz has won awards for this functionality. Is Fritz >still the best for providing "human like" annotations to a chess game? Any >other software that people find useful for this? If programs would stop giving the obvious ideas and go deeper than the ideas of the player, then the player would benefit. Otherwise, the annotation is garbage. Currently, programs' annotations are garbage. Some people might say that pv lines are good enough to tell us what good moves are, but they are not. I do not like looking at lines all day. The lines do not necessarily tell me what is going on in the position. They do not tell me what moves should NOT be played. They do not necessarily enumerate a recommmended sequence of moves. Of course, I could screw around setting up positions and find all this out, but it takes 50x longer than reading good annotations. I say all this as a 1600 USCF player and computer chess programmer. Who opposes or supports this view? Michael Henderson
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.