Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 09:00:23 10/22/05
Go up one level in this thread
On October 21, 2005 at 11:45:39, Günther Simon wrote: >On October 21, 2005 at 11:38:09, chandler yergin wrote: > >>On October 21, 2005 at 02:56:24, Terry McCracken wrote: >> >>>You are aware that ChessBase acknowledges these bugs and has made a patch? >>> >>>Terry >> >>There are no Bugs in any Engine! >>The Engine does nothing. >>The Algorithm does everything! >> >>http://www.seanet.com/~brucemo/topics/minmax.htm >> >>"Let's say that at the root position (the position on the board now), it's >>White's turn to move. The Max function is called, and all of White's legal >>moves are generated. In each resulting position, the "Min" function is called. >>The "Min" function scores the position and returns a value. Since it is White >>to move, and White wants a more positive score if possible, the move with the >>largest score is selected as best, and the value of this move is returned. >> >>The "Min" function works in reverse. The "Min" function is called when it's >>Black's turn to move, and black wants a more negative score, so the move with >>the most negative score is selected. >> >>These functions are dual recursive, meaning that they call each other until the >>desired search depth is reached. When the functions "bottom out", they return >>the result of the "Evaluate" function. >> >>If you call "MinMax" with a depth value of 1, essentially all that happens is >>that the "Evaluate" function is called after each legal move, and the position >>that results in the "best" value for the side to move is selected. If depth is >>greater than one, the other side gets a chance to respond, and chose its best >>move. >> >>The above shouldn't be hard to understand," >> >>To say there is a Bug in the Engine is just not correct! >>To say that the Algorithm is biased.. does not work for some positions >>is not correct. >>If it did, it would not work for any position, and would be disfunctional. > >The biggest crap ever posted... >Even more crappy is to involve Bruces info, which is completely irrelevant >for your nonsense. >You have no idea about the different parts of a program and about the zillions >of bugs, which can appear. > >Guenther Not to belabor this nonsense, but I have seen _plenty_ of "things" that work for some cases, failed for some. The old pentium fdiv bug is one that comes to mind, worked for most operands, but not for all. sqrt() is another, works for numbers >= 0, fails for the rest. Way too many examples of "works for some but not all cases" litter software engineering textbooks. That's the reason that one test case is _never_ enough...
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.