Author: Bruce Moreland
Date: 10:09:44 04/14/99
Go up one level in this thread
On April 14, 1999 at 12:15:35, KarinsDad wrote: >I couldn't have said it much better. The software I am working on has many of >the elements that you describe. How well it will work is yet to be determined. > >However, one other vast area of improvement that I foresee is the endgame. >Having tablebases is fine, however, a tablebase is no different than a typical >player's slight endgame knowledge (the tablebase is just normally more >complete). Once programs really understand endgame concepts, I think that their >level of play will improve dramatically. Endgame databases help in specific very low material situations. These situations come up, but there is usually a lot of endgame play before they come up. Sometimes they can help in situations with slightly more material. An example is KRPP vs KR, where the pawns are on the a- and c-files. This ending can be hard to handle, but the KRP vs KR table lets the program understand the consequences of exchanges, which are critical in this case. I've had either side of this come up, and I've been satisfied with the result. There are plenty of endings where endgame databases have no bearing on the outcome. People often talk about the ending as a place to add sophisticated knowledge, but I've never heard an example. bruce
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.