Author: Eugene Nalimov
Date: 11:03:58 01/21/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 21, 2000 at 13:56:40, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >On January 21, 2000 at 11:44:22, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>It would run so much slower it would get killed tactically. Remember that their >>king safety included not just pawns around the king, but which pieces are >>attacking what squares, from long range as well as close range. Which pieces >>are attacking squares close to the king, etc. That takes a good bit of >>computing to discover. > >I realize that it takes a good bit of computing to discover. But I doubt it >takes so much that it's prohibitive. There are very successful micro programs >with extremely expensive evaluation functions, e.g., MChess and the King, and to >a lesser extent, HIARCS and Zarkov. These programs all reportedly have terms >similar to the ones you describe. I seriously doubt that the DB evaluation >function is an order of magnitude more complex than, say, MChess's... In his IEEE Micro article Hsu estimated his evaluation function as an equivalent to ~40,000 general purpose CPU instructions. (Or is the entire procesing of one node? In any case, that doesn't matter - all other work can be done in 0.5-2k instructions). Eugene >-Tom
This page took 0.01 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.