Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 15:58:16 02/01/00
Go up one level in this thread
On February 01, 2000 at 18:32:11, Côme wrote: >On February 01, 2000 at 18:14:08, Dann Corbit wrote: >>On February 01, 2000 at 18:02:16, Côme wrote: >>[snip] >>>But It doesn't explain why crafty don't find this winning move! >> >>The others found it by accident, or by a different positional evaluation. >>For positions where the answer is not clear, which programs solve it is sort of >>a random number function. The next iteration of the same program may choose a >>different move. >> >>I am not convinced by any answer that does not have an evaluation which shows >>that it knows why it picked the move that it did. >> >>I would be very curious to find a complete list of programs that do solve it >>*AND* a comment by the programmer to explain how it was chosen. >> >>Actually, the list has no value. We already know what the answer is. But the >>comments would have great value. > >I agree with you Dann but Junior 6 show a great advantage for white ! I would not be surprised if Junior 6 chose the move for all the right reasons. However, a +1 pawn evaluation is hardly convincing. In fact, I see computers think that they are up one pawn in gambits all the time, only do discover they are about to get the tar smacked out of themselves. Since Junior seems to be at or among the strongest computer programs in the world at tournament level time controls against other computers, that indicates (to me) enormous tactical ability. Therefore, I suspect that Junior "knows what it is doing." On the other hand, it may be accidental. We will never know unless Amir cares to tell us what is going on with this eval.
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.