Author: Uri Blass
Date: 16:59:19 02/10/06
Go up one level in this thread
On February 10, 2006 at 19:41:09, Ryan B. wrote: >On February 10, 2006 at 08:17:34, Steve Maughan wrote: > >>Uri, >> >>A classic 'Uri' post on your part :-) >> >>>We do not know if the evaluation of rybka is more complex than fruit's >>>evaluation so I disagree that rybka pulls us in the other direction. >> >>Of course we don't - we don't have access to the source. But looking at it's >>play it certainly seems to have a sophisticated evaluation function. I would >>say that my original statement is in line with perceived wisdom. >> > > >I am 100% confident that Rybka's eval is small, well tuned, and mobility based. >The perceived knowledge is due to not having bad or incorrect chess knowledge >and out searching its opponents. What about pablo's observation that Rybka is better than other engines in destoying the stonewall http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?485102 Do you think that the reason is search and not evaluation? 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.