Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 20:04:09 11/02/99
Go up one level in this thread
On November 02, 1999 at 12:24:05, Dave Gomboc wrote:
>On November 02, 1999 at 11:29:31, Christophe Theron wrote:
>
>>Maybe also agressive learning, if it fails to repeat a won game, can at least
>>drive the program into the kind of position it likes (or understand better)
>>
>>I should maybe consider my position again.
>>
>>
>> Christophe
>
>This is one of the main reasons why I asked you if it might be a mistake not to
>do it a little while ago.
>
>Dave
Yes I remember.
I'm reluctant to do it, exactly as I am reluctant to put killer lines in the
book. Jeroen Noomen is in charge of the book and I already told him what I think
about killer lines. The good thing is that Jeroen studies the human theory,
tries to find novelties, and insert them in the book, which is far different
from inserting won games against computers in the book.
It's more interesting for the user I think.
I also strongly believe that one of these days book tricks will not matter much,
and that we are going to come back to the real thing: engine strength.
I'm working in this spirit.
Also I admit that I have not enough experience in automatic learning. Your
remark is still in my mind and I'll have to investigate on this, indeed. Trying
to remember the kind of openings the program plays well is after all not
dishonest I think.
Christophe
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.