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 0.01 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.