TalkChess.com

My apologies. I did not know that I could follow the link. The bigger picture does not look exactly like my board. And according to that article the construction materials are different. So that board is not one of mine. That smaller picture does look like one of my boards though. Amazing!

On the CPW - Chessboard page there is a picture of a chessboard. https://www.chessprogramming.org/Chessboard I made that chessboard when I was 26 years old in 1983. I have no idea who ended up with it or how a picture of it got on the CPW. But here is the story of that chessboard. I always wanted t...

On the CPW - Chessboard page there is a picture of a chessboard. https://www.chessprogramming.org/Chessboard I made that chessboard when I was 26 years old in 1983. I have no idea who ended up with it or how a picture of it got on the CPW. But here is the story of that chessboard. I always wanted to...

In those drawish positions that are really drawish after say the first 12 or so initial iterations show no immediate gain of material the draw detection could be turned on for deeper iterations.

"Sounds very much like MC" Not really, imo. MC is random and requires millions of games to generate deep statistics to base decisions on at the root. And still at the end of that process it is a haphazard approach. It is like making a random dartboard with irregular shaped regions with random values...

But of course we need at least 1000 games to make any sound judgement, since if you beat your closest friend who is close enough in rating in a 100 mere match, he probably will NOT admit of you being stronger unless you beat him in 1000 games, which could be very hard if it was physical fighting to...

At anytime during the search the best move may not be tried first. The best move may make itself known two or more ply later when it is searched and causes a beta cut or maybe just raises alpha significantly. So let's assume that we are at the point in the search where we are making a beta cut. The ...

flok wrote: ↑

Tue May 21, 2019 9:18 am

any news?

Yes! Brainfuck is quickly becoming the language of choice for programming neural networks.

I found one bug and it works better but it still is not quite right. It might be because I'm interpreting what I see in the debugger incorrectly because of fail hard therefore the scores I see are not the true score. So I'm going to switch to fail soft while debugging. However, I was able to play a ...

Thanks Sven and Richard. All good ideas!