Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: What is Botvinnik's legacy to computer chess?

Author: blass uri

Date: 03:48:52 02/21/00

Go up one level in this thread


On February 21, 2000 at 06:37:47, Heiner Marxen wrote:

>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

I said KRB vs KRP and not KRB vs KR

I do not know about tablebases of KRB vs KRP today and generating these
tablebases can take a long time so for practical purposes it is a good idea to
evaluate KRB vs KRP as close to draw(for example 0.4 pawn advantage for black)
otherwise the program may prefer to go for this endgame and may miss a win.

I agree that in the future the situation may be different when tablebases may
help.

Uri



This page took 0 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 07 Jul 11 08:48:38 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.