Author: Heiner Marxen
Date: 03:37:47 02/21/00
Go up one level in this thread
On February 21, 2000 at 02:45:11, blass uri wrote: >On February 20, 2000 at 21:05:47, leonid wrote: > >>On February 20, 2000 at 19:25:10, blass uri wrote: >> >>>On February 20, 2000 at 14:39:24, Christophe Theron wrote: >>> >>>>On February 20, 2000 at 01:39:09, Drazen Marovic wrote: >>>> >>>>>What is Botvinnik's legacy to computer chess? >>>> >>>> >>>>That to write a good chess program it's better not to be a strong chess player. >>> >>>I do not agree about it. >>>You cannot teach your program things that you do not know. >> >>You don't teach your game to play but you depose exact logic to go after. > >I see teaching a program to play the same as deposing exact logic to go after. > >You cannot depose exact logic that you do not know about. > >One example: >You cannot teach program that KRB vs KRP is usually a draw and that the >evaluation should be close to 0.00 if you do not know it and your evaluation by >only counting material may be +2 and you cannot see the 0 by search because you >cannot search deep enough. > >Uri Sorry, while I get your point, I have to disagree. Personally, I do not know what you state above (sound reasonable for me, but may also be wrong IMHO). But I quite well know how to write a program that constructs the according table base, and finds by itself, how to evaluate KRBKRP. So, no direct knowledge is necessary in this case, there is meta knowledge which can turn out to be sufficient. This meta knowledge is partially about chess and partially about programming computers. Regards, Heiner
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.