Author: Chuck
Date: 21:41:46 06/29/99
Go up one level in this thread
On June 29, 1999 at 02:55:24, Roger D Davis wrote: >For me. the unclear versus equality thing is only one small factor in the >question: "Can the backsolving of the same opening book be replicated by >different programs?" For me, that is the question. > >Now the answer. Backsolving depends on migrating leaf node evaluations backward >through the tree. Thing is, when I analyze even one game with different programs >like Fritz 5.32, Hiarcs 7.32, Junior 5.0, Chessmaster 6000, and Rebel 8, I often >get wild variances in the evaluations between programs, especially at crucial >points in the game. And it's exactly those numbers that the program is using to >backsolve with. I really can't imagine taking that variability and multiplying >it by all those programs, and then expecting my opening book to be backsolved in >the same way. I don't think it's worth the time to backsolve computer evaluations for the exact reasons you mention. For the near future, it is probably better to deal with the standard and more general evaluations. Dann Corbitt is running into the same problem with his CAP project, I believe.
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.