Author: Richard G. Fadden
Date: 08:28:32 02/20/06
Let's have some fun! Let's try to figure out what is in Rybka. That's
what most intrigues me right now.
I went through the log of Vasik's postings to CCC, and in 2003 and 2004 he
very clearly spells out a set of new ideas that he indicates he will pursue in
Rybka. At the time he reported on the performance of Rybka, and at the time it
was a relatively fast searcher with BitBoards and most of the agreed good search
technique. And now the numbers coming out show a slow searcher that still
manages to go deep, so it looks like it is highly selective (yet it plays great
chess aparently).
What I find fascinating is that Vasik, in the past, spends quite a bit of
time "talking" about his thoughts on what must be in Shredder, Fritz, and
Junior. So he supplies a really clear statement as to the inventions and
techniques that the authors apparently came up with to make these programs so
great. In other words, if we spend time speculating on what is in Rybka then
our postings look just like Vasik's from that time.
Then I notice from the limited informaiton of my search that Vasik is not
posting in the year 2005. At the end of this time period we see Rybka seemingly
on top of Shredder, Fritz, Junior, etc., and so it looks like he has been doing
exactly what he said he would do.
I'd like to cut and paste some of these historic CCC postings in my own
postings of this thread - as long as my fellow members don't mind.
I noticed three really interesting "threads" of ideas from Vasik's
postings, and I'll mention one now. He refers to a possibly "Non-Symmetric"
evaluation approach. I am not the best expert on CCC concerning this ongoing
topic, but I think I could summarize why I am intrigued with this notion.
1. Imagine Rybka has a great evaluation of the prospects of passed pawns...
Then imagine us noting that other programs clearly do not include this logic
(just assume this is true so I can make my point)... During eval, why give
other programs "credit" for seeing the true nature of a passed pawn... why not
assume that the other program is dumb on this subject. So, can we possibly look
at things in a "non-symmetric" fashion assuming for example that the opponent
will evaluate a static position with less knowledge?
I suspect that someone here is going to tell me that my description is not
an actual example of a non-symmetric eval. That's OK, please tell me what you
think, because I'm just starting the topic so others can pipe up and tell us
what they know. Also, someone who has been here through '03, '04, and '05 (not
me) could comment about the past Search and Eval threads where Vasik also
contributed his thoughts.
What do you think? Is this not fun? If not, then what is fun... (possibly
a day on a sunny beach)?
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.