Author: Stuart Cracraft
Date: 21:34:48 03/06/06
Go up one level in this thread
On March 07, 2006 at 00:31:45, Dann Corbit wrote: >On March 07, 2006 at 00:27:43, Stuart Cracraft wrote: >[snip] >>Very interesting indeed. A clever test. >> >>If one's results do not rotate approximately as described >>for the four positions and you say the evaluation is an >>issue, what kinds of evaluation issues have you seen that >>could explain it?!? > >The most common thing that I see is something that is good for white being >counted as positive for black also on the evaluation. Often, when we are >writing the eval, we are thinking from the perspective of white. And so if we >are not very careful, we may invert the sign of some evaluation component and >count something that is good for white as something that is good for black (or >vice versa, though the reverse is seen less often for some reason). > >There are, of course, many other possible causes besides that. A good point. I try to avoid that by always doing things from the side on move, almost always. There are a few in there however with respect to white and black specifically, but they are then folded together with the stm variable and stm^1 which translate to white/black or black/white depending on who's on move. I could try this: rerun your rotation test with successively less in the evaluation table until nothing but material and see what happens. Stuart
This page took 0.02 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.