Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 12:16:47 02/17/99
Go up one level in this thread
On February 17, 1999 at 14:57:38, James Robertson wrote: >On February 17, 1999 at 13:58:38, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >>On February 17, 1999 at 13:41:33, Will Singleton wrote: >> >>> >>>On February 17, 1999 at 08:18:01, Djordje Vidanovic wrote: >>> >>>>Bob, >>>> >>>>I read your report carefully. The story is over for me. I know where I am now, >>>>and what I have been doing. About my doubts -- yes, I did have them but there >>>>was that different style of play, my good faith and a rationally based >>>>conviction that the author is a brillant person. For all I know the author IS a >>>>brilliant person. However, I have enough evidence now to form my opinion about >>>>those early versions of Voyager -- R=3, some eval changes (e. g. bishops getting >>>>more bonus vs. knights than you assigned), plus some other Voyager specific >>>>changes which I will not mention now as the author is still, I think, working on >>>>the program (hopefully making a wholly new product). Bob, thanks for doing what >>>>I thought you should surely do -- presenting evidence. From now on, the version >>>>playing on ICC (a terrific blitz player otherwise) will be labelled as Voyager, >>>>by Robert Hyatt, modified by G. Mueller. I do intend to run it more when I have >>>>time, as I truly believe it to be one of the best blitzers on the Net. >>>> >>>>There are some other points that I have raised in the discussions with Dan Homan >>>>and Jeremiah Pennery that I think are worth further elucidation. Perhaps later >>>>at some point. >>>> >>>>Regards, >>>>Djordje >>> >>> >>>Looking at the results of testing posted on your website, it appears that Mr. >>>Mueller has done something pretty remarkable; that is, he has found significant >>>grounds for improvement in a program that has been under development for years >>>by RH. What, exactly, are the changes that have improved it? For a program >>>that beats Crafty on equal hardware in *every* single match (as you state), I >>>think people would be extremely interested to know how he did it. This could be >>>very exciting. >>> >>>Would it be possible to post or otherwise publish the parts of the code that >>>were changed, so that we may share in this great achievement? >>> >>>Re your new labeling of MagusX, etc, I don't know if Bob wrote a program called >>>Voyager. I thought it was Crafty. Other people have modified versions running, >>>and to my knowledge they retain the Crafty name. Maybe I'm wrong about that, >>>don't know. >> >>I don't think so that voyager is improved compared to crafty. >> >>It uses R=3 and some alpha beta dependant extensions, and a good book. >> >>That is: at blitz it seems a little faster because of this R=3, however >>i'm sure that at a slow match it will not perform better than crafty. >>It shows *exactly* the same scores and mainlines after say 12 or 13 ply >>search. > >Would it help Crafty to find out how much time it has left, if it is less than >say, 15 seconds, set R=3, otherwise R=2? > >James > Sounds risky, because you would change the search in the middle of something, and then would have to compare some scores computed with R=3 to some with R=2. And they don't compare very well... >> >>I doubt whether some alfabeta dependant extensions which solve some >>problems quicker will *ever* make a program play better in a 3 mins a move >>match at reasonable hardware. >> >>>Will
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.