Author: Marc-Olivier Moisan-Plante
Date: 03:33:18 09/04/05
Go up one level in this thread
On September 04, 2005 at 05:41:43, Jorge Pichard wrote: Hi Jorge, I will quote from the chessbase.com site (Hydra vs Shredder): http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=1875 "After the match Chrilly Donninger revealed a few secrets regarding the openings book preparation: "Our openings specialist GM Christopher Lutz was given instructions to unleash Hydra after move ten. He managed that perfectly, and Hydra could in most cases immediately go on the attack. Normally openings book authors play private matches against each other at the cost of the programs. Ulf Lorenz [the second Hydra programmer] and I were convinced that Hydra was better than these openings muddles. And we were right. Only in the eighth game we were in a spot of trouble after the opening." I also recall reading that Hydra's "Rb1!?" in the first game against Michael Adams was an "over the board" novelty from Hydra (I could be wrong however as I can't find my source). In any case, there are positions where it is better to let the program "think" by itself than to rely on GM's games. It will play move that it "understands". One must be careful however about the type of positions: i.e. I'm not sure I would let a program think by itself as the white side of a Benko gambit (though It could find some surprises maybe!?). Cheers, >On September 04, 2005 at 05:37:48, Jorge Pichard wrote: > >>Too many people like to use long GM's Openings for computer programs, but there >>is a drawback to this approach. Todays computer programs has reached a level of >>play that is higher than some of the best GM players. In order to avoid this >>from happening, most Opening Expert like Necchi and Harry Schapp to name a few >>will have to consider checking each opening where the two GM left as an even >>game with the top programs to analyse up to at least 6 more moves and only if >>after those 6 moves if the opening is still consider even, then the opening >>could be included with the rest of its opening library. We should be very >>carefull not to feed long Opening line above 12 moves from GMs. Please take a >>look a this game, and how many other bad human openings are still there in some >>of the best programs that we constanstly pit or match, favouring one side or the >>other. Here is a famous game where two of our best computer monsters were using >>the exact bad opening fed directly from a game of two GMs: > >PS: That is the reason why I limit Opening lines up to 12 half moves, specially >if those openings were played by human GM. > >http://wired-vig.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,68243,00.html
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.