Author: Albert Silver
Date: 07:32:33 12/10/05
Go up one level in this thread
On December 09, 2005 at 15:16:29, Vasik Rajlich wrote:
>On December 08, 2005 at 08:29:26, Albert Silver wrote:
>
>>On December 08, 2005 at 05:48:39, Vasik Rajlich wrote:
>>
>>>On December 08, 2005 at 01:05:57, Albert Silver wrote:
>>>
>>>>I can't recall Deep Fritz 8 ever looking in such bad shape. It lost even winning
>>>>attacks. Here is one position where I was certain Rybka was done for:
>>>>
>>>>[D]5k1r/pb3q2/1p2p1Rp/3nPp1Q/2r2P2/P5P1/1P2N3/4KB1R w K - 0 32
>>>>
>>>>yet 20 some moves later the position looked like this:
>>>>
>>>>[D]8/p7/1p2p1k1/1P2Pp2/P2r1PnP/5Q1K/R5B1/2q5 b - - 0 56
>>>>
>>>>I think Rybka is a poor name. Houdini seems more appropriate.
>>>>
>>>>Bear in mind that this was played using Rybka's "slightly positional" profile.
>>>>My purpose is to test the other as well under identical conditions in order to
>>>>better see how they differ in terms of performance and style. That, and the fact
>>>>Rybka doesn't have its own book, is why I choose to play with the Nunn2 set.
>>>>CEGT reportes that Rybka suffered a marginal loss to Hiarcs 9 as well as a
>>>>serious one to Chess Tiger 15, so Tiger will be the next opponent in the series.
>>>>Then I'll see what the other styles show.
>>>>
>>>>Athlon64 Sempron 3400+
>>>>Hash: 256 Mb; ponder off
>>>>Time Control: 10min + 2 sec
>>>>Nunn2 Openings set
>>>>
>>>>1 Rybka "SP" Beta 32-bit +24/-3/=13 76.25 30.5/40
>>>>2 Deep Fritz 8 +3/-24/=13 23.75 9.5/40
>>>>
>>>>The first match against the default "very positional" style yielded
>>>>
>>>>1 Rybka "VP" Beta 32-bit +18/-10/=12 60.00 24.0/40
>>>>2 Deep Fritz 8 +10/-18/=12 40.00 16.0/40
>>>>
>>>>Bear in mind, one match means nothing so no conclusions other than it is a
>>>>different and interesting style should be inferred.
>>>>
>>>
>>>I just want to make a comment about the positional vs tactical settings. These
>>>slightly affect the way search is handled.
>>
>>Could you elaborate a bit?
>>
>>
>
>Tactical settings will spend relatively more time on "forcing" moves. These
>include captures, checks, and certain threatening moves.
>
>Also, none of the settings are especially extreme - I could believe that any of
>the four might be the best. It would also be possible to make a special
>testsuite-crunching version, ie. an ultra-tactical setting. Going too far in the
>other extreme wouldn't really make much sense - it's hard to play good
>positional moves when you don't see any tactics :)
Heh-heh. I hear you. When I hear a low-rated player or student tell me they
prefer plans and strategy, or they want to do like Capablanca and start with
endings, I tell them that's fine, but all the plans and endgame knowledge won't
do them much good if they are playing a piece down. ;-)
Albert
>
>Vas
>
>>>They will not change the general feel
>>>of the program for a human observer. Only different evaluation terms can do
>>>this.
>>>
>>>Vas
This page took 0.01 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.