Author: Lin Harper
Date: 18:38:58 07/10/05
Go up one level in this thread
Hi Djordje, In addition to the interesting info in this thread, there are just a couple of things I would like to add. In the case of search depth versus knowledge, you quite rightly pointed out that search depth *is* knowledge. Since the basic problem of a chess programmer is correct allocation of limited processing capacity, perhaps in the case of Fruit2.1, the programmer has succeeded in his effort to include only vital, not unnecessary knowledge, so that the released capacity has driven the search another ply, or at least part of a ply. This applies to Shredder too, of course. I remember some time ago the author of Hiarcs saying that he had vastly increased the knowledge in his new version. This could only have come at the expense of search depth, and so was a mistake. Just one other point re: Fruit2.1. I could'nt help notice that Fruit2.1 has a preference for knights over bishops. This I noticed over a series of too many games played on Arena for it to be random. I'm only guessing, but could it be that the knight, handled correctly, is a stronger piece overall than a bishop? And that this has not been recognized in the chess community until now simply because it has been impossible to search deep enough to demonstrate? Food for thought. all the best Lin
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.