Author: Harald Faber
Date: 05:18:33 07/21/99
Go up one level in this thread
On July 21, 1999 at 06:40:17, Ed Schröder wrote: >>Posted by Harald Faber on July 20, 1999 at 04:44:28: > >>Clear, but it is too much work for only one man. >>I think a good idea would be to build kind of Rebel user group and create >>sub-groups which have to try different areas, e.g. one is simply adjusting the >>king safety, another one the passed pawns etc., more combinations possible of >>course. > >No way. If you for instance change mobility you seriously should >consider to change pawn structure too. A higher mobility (for >example) would favor open rook files which in return could cause >the program to accept double pawns too easy. So all of these >functions in some way are related to each other. I know, this was just an example. Of course you can bundle some settings. So in your example you may tell a group only to tune mobility and pawn structure or so. BTW I don't believe you will find that many interested that you can build such groups, although it would be senseful... >>Just an idea. And of course it probably needs more testers than >>available and willing. :-) > >I know, that's why I thought some (encourage) prize money is justified :-) > >Ed Schroder That leads me to the following question: How do you judge which are the best settings? If I give to you 100 games 40/120 against the SSDF-TOP5 with a sound overall result, would that be OK? Or do you have a special (secret) set of test positions with which you verify the "best" settings?
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.