Computer Chess Club Archives




Subject: knowledge and blitz; search and long games

Author: Joseph Ciarrochi

Date: 00:07:50 02/15/06

I have a naive question...

in my understanding, Fruit has excellent search efficiency but not huge amounts
of knowledge. In contrast, Fritz 9 and Rybka have substantial knowledge. If you
can trust Rybka's depth outputs, it does not seem to be as quick at getting to
deeper plys.

I have observed that Fruit 2.2.1 tends to play poorly at blitz and improve
steadly with long time controls, with it being an absolute god on the longest
time controls (SSDF). In contrast, both rybka and fritz 9 play blitz well.

do programs with more knowledge tend to play blitz better? Knowledge is kind of
a quick, heuristic way of making a decision about what is likely to work. It
presumably can come into play very quickly. In contrast, search takes time.
However, it does discover when the knowledge is not useful (i.e., when the
knowledge heuristic is inconsistent with the concrete variations uncovered by
search; e.g., doubled pawns may generally be bad (knowledge heuristic), but in
some situations can be quite good)

is my reasoning correct? Maybe it would help for me to understand what
constitutes "knowledge" in a chess program. I always presume its things like
"doubled pawns are often bad" or two bishops are good, or it is often good to
push pawns and have space..


This page took 0.02 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 07 Jul 11 08:48:38 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.