Author: gerold daniels
Date: 05:40:35 07/24/05
Go up one level in this thread
On July 24, 2005 at 06:41:58, Jorge Pichard wrote: >On July 24, 2005 at 06:15:54, George Tsavdaris wrote: > > > >FF: We went for a long walk and I asked him how much time he spent tuning his >programs to play against other programs. He said 60-80% of his development time. >Then I asked him how much we, ChessBase, profited from this time. He said, well, >we beat most of the other programs. Finally, I asked what would happen if we >spent all that time teaching it how to play against human beings. Frans thought >for a minute and said, “I think we should be doing that.” > >http://www.chesscafe.com/mig/mig.htm >_______________________________________________________________________________ >This was my sugestion of how to accomplish this task: > >My sugestion to prevent human AntiChess is to incorporate an algorithm, in which >the program would force to exchange at least three pawns early in the game >before it reach the middlegame, even if it lose one pawn for the cause. I notice >that in most AntiChess game, the position always ended up being blocked by at >least 5 pawns. > >Jorge > >Yes, but implementing this algorithm would *maybe* weaken the engine in engine >vs engine matches, in which more people are interested. > >But all in all it is a good plan, but not in the engine in general. It should be >included as an option in the parameters, something like Tiger's "Anti-Human" >style. "Anti-AntiChess" lol. It is hard to think how they could make it play stronger vs. Pablo and Ed. and still Play as strong vs.Fruit. :). unless they do as you say make option for it to play "Anti-AntiChess" :)
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.