Author: Matthias Gemuh
Date: 07:28:52 03/04/06
Go up one level in this thread
On March 04, 2006 at 09:43:31, walt irvin wrote: >there has been a huge effert in making chess engines great at search >rybka,shredder,fritz,hiarcs ect ect,,,,,how much effert has there been on a good >learning feature????? i maintain a chess program should not have to analyze the >same position x2 once the position has a history,,,,,as a very radical example >think of this some one writes a chess program and calls it darwin ,,the way it >makes its move is first it checks its position database if the position is there >it makes the next winning move or drawing move otherwise it makes a legal move >at randome,,,,,then you play this thing auto vs all the best programs with >various books 50,000 games,,,, if nothing else he would remember every single >position and the exact move to make from all those games and would now play the >moves those programs played ,,,,,,so now u would have a program with no >evaluation what so ever competing on a equal bases vs the best programs imagine >if that program that learned like that were shredder or fritz ???????????? just >a thought that learning has not been developed like searches have,,,,,,,,, > >walter irvin To go this way, every engine would need TeraBytes of disk space and same amount of RAM (i.e. memory). I think the only part of engine development that has been neglected is automatic tuning of evaluation parameters. Matthias.
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.