Author: Kurt Utzinger
Date: 09:50:23 04/25/05
Go up one level in this thread
On April 25, 2005 at 12:05:52, Steve Glanzfeld wrote:
>The observations from these games are important. It is obvious, that programs
>should use a effective "no progress" rule. For example, when they evaluate
>positively form themselves over a LONG sequence of moves, but the eval doesn't
>get significantly better, they must consider "unusual" moves which change the
>situation dramatically and let expect progress within small depths (as long as
>the eval is still positive for the program, like RxNf1 in your example).
>
>Progs really look stupid in these time losses...
>
>Steve
Hi Steve
An interesting idea you have presented here. On the
other hand: such problems (time losses) if one plays
with the Fischer clock modud (4m+2s).
Kurt
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.