Author: Uri Blass
Date: 07:06:54 01/05/06
Go up one level in this thread
On January 05, 2006 at 09:49:08, Kirill Kryukov wrote: >Hi Tord, > >Interesting opinion. Yes, engine itself will also benefit from additional time >and money investement. > >On January 05, 2006 at 09:06:20, Tord Romstad wrote: > >>Hi Kirill, >> >>I agree that testing without books or with generic books can be just as >>interesting as testing with the engine's own books (and indeed I run all >>my own tests without books). However, I disagree with almost all the >>reasons you give for prefering to test with the engine books: >> >>On January 05, 2006 at 08:02:37, Kirill Kryukov wrote: >> >>>1. Opening book quality is directly proportional to the amount of money invested >>>into the chess program. Engine strength, on the other hand, is proportional >>>mostly to the talent and efforts of the programmer. >> >>No. Engine strength is also to a large extent proportional to the amount >>of money invested. If I had enough money, I could quit my job and work >>on my engine many hours every day, instead of just an occasional hour on >>late nights or in the weekends. I could buy a dozen computers to help me >>run automated matches very quickly. Instead of clumsily attempt to program >>in a low-level language which I don't really know at all, I could write >>prototypes of my program in Lisp and hire a C or assembly language wizard >>to do the dirty optimisation and low-level work. All of this would give >>a *much* bigger strength boost to my engine+book package than if I hired >>some opening book expert to work on my opening book. > >Yes, to quit job and buy more computers is I guess everyone's dream here. :-) I >think all professional engines were once amateur engines, so everyone starts at >the same point and works the way up. I am also not aware of anyone hiring >assembler guru to develop an engine, while asking someone's help to make book is >very common. > > >>Writing a top chess engine isn't just about talent. It also takes lots >>of time; probably too much time for the average hobbyist. Of course >>talent helps, but I don't think this is any less true for book creation. >>I know that I could never make a good opening book, no matter how much >>time or money you gave me to do it. > >Hmm.. My point was that book is in more direct proportion from investement, >comparing to the engine. You need some good ideas to make a top level engine, >but you only need time to make a decent book, if you know how to do it. (I don't >know at least). > > >>>2. Opening book can easily be a team work, most engines are creation of a single >>>guy. >> >>Most of the high quality opening books *are* creations of a single person, >>just like chess engines. In principle opening books can of course be >>made by a team, but so can chess engines. Besides, what is wrong with >>team work? > >One person can create a book, then another can pick it up and start improving it >right away. It does not work like this with engines, because usually only one >person can keep in mind everything and keep working on engine. It takes lot of >time to simply understand how an engine works, and even more before you can do >meaningful changes or even improvements. :-) > > >>>3. Opening book is about memorization, engine is about playing chess. >> >>Huh? I don't see how creating an opening book for a chess program has >>anything to do with memorisation. > >Engine does not think when it uses book. It does not make decisions, they are >already made by book designer. While it is opening decisions which are the most >interesting and important. Movei does not calulate in the opening book but I think that I plan to change it in the future and to have only very small book that the program plays in 0 seconds when later it may use both statistics about games and both analysis to decide about the choice of the move. It is not in the top of my priorities so it is not going to happen in the near future(probably it is not going to happen in the next year). 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.