Author: Sune Fischer
Date: 09:45:39 08/02/02
Go up one level in this thread
On August 02, 2002 at 12:11:48, Rudolf Huber wrote: > >Any respectable result (>=25%) of TDLeaf would be a big surprise >to me. In my experience, automatic learning methods quickly learn the >simple things but have a hard time with the finer aspects of chess. > >So for me it is not really necessary to use a common search engine >as a base to prove the point that the TDLeaf method has potential. The problem is, that if you take a new engine that isn't very optimized to begin with, you are not proving it can be done _better_ than hand tuning. I think we can agree TDLeaf is better than nothing as the KnightCap project showed, but would it work well enough to also improve on Crafty? >And one should also note that hand tuning will profit from public >source code which gives it a big advantage. Hand tuning has it's limits. You can't adjust every weight to 1/100th pawn accuracy, there are thusands of weights with non-linear relations. Given the computerpower, I think it would be possible to do it better than a human tuning. For instance, do you have any idea what the right material values are? Some use 1, 3, 3, 5.5, 9 and others 0.8, 3, 3.3, 6, 11 or what ever. I think the *real* values are impossible to guess, it's probably something like: 1.08, 3.12, 3.35, 5,87, 10.64 or in other words - impossible to find without machine tuning. -S. > Rudolf
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.