Author: Kenny Dail
Date: 17:01:52 03/04/06
Go up one level in this thread
On March 04, 2006 at 15:05:59, Dann Corbit wrote: >On March 04, 2006 at 07:25:23, Kenny Dail wrote: > >>I kind of think the idea of a GUI book is currently a silly implementation and >>would like to see a better standard appear. >> >>I would not like it if I went to a tournament and the TD came and told me which >>moves I was going to play. For me at least, opening selection and preparation is >>part the game of chess, by forcing me to play someone else's opening lines, is >>more like playing a chess variant. I don't know of any chess organizations that >>allow "thematic" tournaments to be figured into a person's rating. >> >>To make a book useful, (GUI or otherwise) there needs to be input from the >>player. At the very least presenting the list of "acceptable" moves to the >>player and letting it select the one it likes. Thus the player can try to steer >>towards games that fit it's style. >> >>Ideally a good book setup will allow the engine to add new lines, or break from >>the book if it doesn't like any of the available lines. For example if the book >>supplied has only 1 e4 available, then engine should still be allowed to play 1 >>d4, and add that line to the book for future reference. >> >>For a book that is going to be used by multiple engines, there shoulb be engine >>specific tags available, so each engine can keep it's own notes as well be able >>to access global stats. > >You make an interesting point. There should be two different types of book >information: >Thematic moves (you MUST perform the requested move) >Suggested moves (the book will make a suggestion that you can take or leave). > >I remember that Crafty used to analyze book moves at 10% or so just to make sure >that it wasn't about to do something silly based on a bad stored move. > >Arena has a checkbox for "own book" so you can use an Arena book, or allow the >program to use its own book. > >The problem addressed by this thread is not necessarily about book utilization, >but in creating a better book for use by amateur chess engine authors and >amateur book authors. I think that the Rybka book notes are revealing. The >ChessBase format was chosen because currently, the book author is unaware of any >decent tools for making a good book in some other format. *That* is the problem >that is being addressed. Well, then to try and put this into relevance, If the GUIs would cater to the needs of the engines as outlined above, then there wouldn't be a need to build engine specific books. Instead the engine could train the GUI. The author would then only have to use an API and supply a sample of games for the engine to parse into the book.
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.