Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 14:55:54 12/10/03
Go up one level in this thread
On December 10, 2003 at 16:09:34, Omid David Tabibi wrote: >On December 10, 2003 at 07:02:14, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: > >>On December 10, 2003 at 06:55:35, Omid David Tabibi wrote: >> >>>Another scenario: >>> >>>Sjeng isn't having a lucky day and in move 16 of a tactical variation in >>>Sicilian, suddenly the amateur opponent engine plays a brilliant sacrifice >>>resulting in a forced win. But your opponent frowns and realizes this is the CB >>>GUI and not his engine (which doesn't support book at all). He requests to take >>>back the move played by the GUI, disable book in GUI, and let the engine try to >>>find the move on its own. >>> >>>Of course you know the engine can never find this mate on its own, so if you >>>allow it you are saved and if you refuse you lose the chance for the world >>>title. >>> >>>Do you consider it reasonable to allow him to do this? I DON'T! >> >>My question here would be who made the book. > >Let's look at it this way: > >The author created the book himself, but didn't write the access code. It is >pretty much like EGTB, you use the EGTB but haven't written your own access code >for it. > >The only question you will ask now, is whether the author has written the EGTB >himself? No, but he does have permission to use it I guess. For example, if you >get special permission to use the fritz opening book, you can use it. That's >also the case with EGTB. > >So, basically, there is no difference between the interface playing from book, >or from EGTB. > > Actually there is a _big_ difference. Playing from an egtb is a deterministic procedure. There is no choice. You just pick the moves at leads to the shortest mate. With a book, there is _plenty_ of room for creativity in choosing a book line. IE you have lots of information about a particular book move: wining percentage, number of times played (higher means the winning percentage is more reliable), learning scores, maybe CAP scores, maybe human comments (this is aggressive, this is passive, this is drawish, this is sharp, etc.) How you use all that information to choose a single book move is much more creative than just looking up a position in an endgame table. And, in my case, I can actually choose a sub-set of book moves and then search them to choose the best, if I want... Which gets the engine involved in choosing a book line also. >> >>-- >>GCP
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.