Author: KarinsDad
Date: 08:55:03 08/04/99
Go up one level in this thread
On August 04, 1999 at 11:02:46, Fernando Villegas wrote: >I am not a programmer, but a seasoned player and maybe I can hint to other way >to see this problem of the “easy moves” on the ground of what a human player >thinks and do when faced with an obvious move to do. And what an experienced >player do is to discriminate between two different classes of “obvious moves”: >normal ones and those to answer maybe-winning-sacrifices moves by the rival. >A normal one is just to recapture a piece that has made a normal capture before. >If my opponent take my bishop with a knight, so not giving nothing for free, I >just analyze a few ply in order to discover if that capture is or not part of a >mate combination, specially if that happens near my king. Mates combinations >beginning with a normal capture -by example, to kill a defensive piece before >launching the mate attack- normally are inside an horizon of no more -normally- >than 6 ply. So in these kind of cases -recapture after a “normal” capture- that >should be enough in a couple of seconds of search for the program. >But then we have the second class of obvious moves, those that follow an >strange, no normal move. If my opponent play Bxh3+ , so losing at once material, >I tend to thinks that is part of a masive attack and so i will not recapture at >once, but take a deep look, in fact deeper than against any other normal move. A >program should do the same each time an aparent sacrifice is being performed. An >ad-hon culd be to consier the quealuty of he previous moves. I suppose that an >opponent that have played several best moves according he program is not a >beginner and so every unbalanced mve that he do shuld be consdered with the >utmost care. And vice versa. >So, easy moves should be treated depending of what class of capture is being >perfomed by the opponent. Is a balanced one in terms of material? Happens near >the king or the queen? Is not balaced but on the contrary lose material? >I Hope not to bother nobody with maybe an obvious analysis...:-) >Fernando Good point. However, I often see in GM games an in between move after a capture. The opponent HAS to reply to the in between move and then a move or several moves later, the first GM picks up the "normal obvious retake". I think it would be difficult to differentiate between many different types of forced moves without searching further (in the current paradigms). I think this area of chess programming is a non-trivial one which can only be resolved when programs start thinking more like humans and less like deep searchers. KarinsDad :)
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.