Any reason for such optimism, Herr Ruxy ?Sylwy wrote:
1.-I suspect for a free The Baron 3.xx together with a free Diep (the newest class) !
SilvianR
It would be awesome!
Cheers,
CL
Moderators: hgm, Rebel, chrisw
Any reason for such optimism, Herr Ruxy ?Sylwy wrote:
1.-I suspect for a free The Baron 3.xx together with a free Diep (the newest class) !
SilvianR
Absolutely no one !carldaman wrote:Any reason for such optimism, Herr Ruxy ?Sylwy wrote:
1.-I suspect for a free The Baron 3.xx together with a free Diep (the newest class) !
SilvianR
Cheers,
CL
Surepkumar wrote:Nice draw positions for fooling engines! Are there some more?1 6k1/8/6PP/3B1K2/8/2b5/8/8 b - - 0 1
2 8/8/r5kP/6P1/1R3K2/8/8/8 w - - 0 1
3 7k/R7/7P/6K1/8/8/2b5/8 w - - 0 1
4 8/8/5k2/8/8/4qBB1/6K1/8 w - - 0 1
5 8/8/8/3K4/8/4Q3/2p5/1k6 w - - 0 1
6 8/8/4nn2/4k3/8/Q4K2/8/8 w - - 0 1
7 8/k7/p7/Pr6/K1Q5/8/8/8 w - - 0 1
8 k7/p4R2/P7/1K6/8/6b1/8/8 w - - 0 1
+1 good commentCardoso wrote:....
Anyway an engine is the sum of eval + search, and only that sum can produce a program that actualy can play chess at an high level.
I used to consider the eval as probably the most important part of an engine.
Turns out I was wrong, time proved (at least to me) that engines that prune like hell and have light evals can be really strong.
best regards,
Alvaro
I think that the way to try to decide which evaluation is better should be by evaluation contests based on a fixed search rules to test both evaluations with the same number of nodes.mjlef wrote:Measuring this is pretty hard. Larry and I have discussed this a lot. It is not very hard to make two programs (with full source code, of course) search alike, so we can play them against each other to try and measure the evaluation quality. But values that work at shallow depths do not always also work in deeper searches. One example is king safety. The strongest programs I have seen source code (or written) have very high values for say the ability to check the opponent's king. The values often look crazy high. This works in deep searches but seem bad at shallow searches. So the effect is if a program is tuned for a shallow search it might look like it has a better eval than one better suited for deep searches.
But anyway, we love trying to measure these things. I can confirm that Komodo's eval is "bigger" (has more terms and does more things) that Stockfish. I hope it is better, but it is very hard to prove, or even measure.