Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 00:37:19 01/13/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 13, 2000 at 01:11:19, Jeremiah Penery wrote: [snip] >For #1, I don't think the key is finding Nxh6. The key is to find that it is >winning, namely by finding 2. Nf5! If they play Nxh6 with a -1 eval or so (as >all the programs on your page were doing), and follow up with inferior moves, >they are still going to lose. The test is really about finding _winning_ moves, >and IMO, you must find that the move is winning to have really solved any of >these positions. This is a bone of contention with me as well. If an eval shows -1000 and the right move is chosen, it means nothing if the eval should be +1000. I think there should also be a minimal ce value for important tests to know if they really found the move. It would also remove a loophole used by some programs to "exit early" as soon as they happen to hit the right move (for any reason -- without regard to ce). "LOOK HOW FAST WE SOLVE THE TEST!!" Sure, but your program thought it was losing on 40% of the answers. :-(
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.