Author: walt irvin
Date: 07:52:52 03/04/06
Go up one level in this thread
On March 04, 2006 at 09:56:10, Charles Roberson wrote: > > There is a lot of effort in machine learning applied to chess > and to other areas. > > What you describe is one of the worst ways to do it. > The random part is the killer to your thought. > The number of total positions in all possible chess matches is far > greater than any database can handle. that may be true but im sure that 50,000 or 60,000 games is not that hard to do,,,,besides if u used a strong program instead of that random one i talked about you could store positions up until say the score of + or - 3.5 should also eliminate alot of positions,,,,, on the more exoctic side u could use pattern recognition ???? im sure that would not be too easy though ???? but i dont think u need e2-e4 and mate in 127 heehhehehe just need to get a substantial advantage out of the openning,,,,,,,a decent program dont need a huge advantage to win a game,,, walter irvin > Just look at the work on endgame table bases -- they create a > database of all possible board positions and moves for 3,4,5 > and 6 pieces on the board. They are quite large and take a > huge amount of time to generate. > Better to do legal moves instead of random ones. Also, better to not even > try moves that the search indicates are bad or at least very bad. > > I could go on for pages on this. I suggest you do a paper search in > google if you want to continue your research on this. Topics could be: > machine learning, position learning, bayesian learning, neural networks, > temporal difference learning.......
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.