Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 15:58:19 12/10/03
Go up one level in this thread
On December 10, 2003 at 18:23:44, Omid David Tabibi wrote: >On December 10, 2003 at 17:55:54, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>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. > >Yes, but when using the popular interfaces like Fritz or Shredder, the engine is >totally asleep in the opening phase. > For that interface, yes. But we are talking about "interface" in the general sense. But even without that, the GUI makes several decisions in choosing a book line. That is different than a table base probe which is just a direct index into a table to get a number. > > >> >> >> >> >>>> >>>>-- >>>>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.