Author: Uri Blass
Date: 16:57:45 12/15/05
Go up one level in this thread
On December 15, 2005 at 19:38:51, Stuart Cracraft wrote: >On December 15, 2005 at 19:18:37, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>I also agree and I never underestimated fruit's evaluation. >>It is possible that the main reason for it's superior evaluation is the idea of >>average between opening and endgame but it is fact that it has a superior >>evaluation. > >Really? Just the line from fruit:eval.c: > > eval = ((opening * (256 - phase)) + (endgame * phase)) / 256; > >I find that VERY hard to believe. That concept has been around a >very long-time. I do not read much source code of free programs so I do not know but I wonder if free source code programs before fruit use that idea and have for every term endgame evaluation and opening evaluation. I use it for some things and I learned the idea from fruit but most of my evaluation does not use that idea and I may rewrite the evaluation and test. > >You must propose something better. > >Superior evaluation? > >That code is trivially small. > >So, small is beautiful? bigger has the potential to be better but it is not always better. I believe that Rybka's evaluation is even better than fruit's evaluation but fruit's evaluation is better than the evaluation of most top programs including Shredder9. Uri
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.