Waschbaer wrote:
The goal (finding good moves, and good moves are the winning one) is the same, but the method choosen to get "knowledge" about good moves should take care for the given hardware (complex, pattern recognition contra error free calculation, speed).
A good programmer knows about that, Botwiniks approach was wrong.
Don't be so sure Mr. Botvinnik was in fault ! Let a bit IT to progress !
SilvianR
Dr Botvinnik was a genius, not only in chess. Of course this doesn't mean that he must be right on everything.
But i think that his idea, for which an engine should reason like a human, with the support of the calculations of a machine, is basically right.
Waschbaer wrote:
The goal (finding good moves, and good moves are the winning one) is the same, but the method choosen to get "knowledge" about good moves should take care for the given hardware (complex, pattern recognition contra error free calculation, speed).
A good programmer knows about that, Botwiniks approach was wrong.
Don't be so sure Mr. Botvinnik was in fault ! Let a bit IT to progress !
SilvianR
Dr Botvinnik was a genius, not only in chess. Of course this doesn't mean that he must be right on everything.
But i think that his idea, for which an engine should reason like a human, with the support of the calculations of a machine, is basically right.
Milton wrote:I purchased Houdini 3 yesterday and I was wondering about its use with Scorpio Bitbases.
I currently have the program configured to use Nalimov egtbs (3-5 piece). If I configure the program to use Scorpio bitbases simultaneously with the Nalimov table bases, would the net result be positive, negative, or neutral with respect to playing strength?
My computer has an I7 990x processor with 9Gb ram. Thanks!
Scorpio bitbases- like all bitbases- are loaded into the RAM memory !!!
And used in search !
Not the same thing for Nalimov TBs !
It's the same thing like in Shredder (Shredderbases+Nalimov) or Chiron (Scorpio+Nalimov/Gaviota) or Patzer or Yace or............situations.
SilvianR
That is right Ruxy. I am just glad the best chess engine in the whole world ,a.k.a Harry Handcaff Houdini supports my work. May elo points rain over him.
Cheers
Thanks, very interesting. I turned off Nalimov in Fritz, and the Scorpio bitbases loaded properly. I left the default Scorpio bb cache as it was (32 MB).
I think I will stick with the 6-man Nalimov when using Houdini with the Fritz GUI and only use the Scorpio bb's with the other GUI's.
Quite impressed with this new Houdini -- it's finally become a great all-around analysis tool.
Aser Huerga wrote:Robert, one more question, do you think Tactical mode is a right setting for endgames? If not, how about a Endgame mode in the near future?
Thanks.
Aser, in end games the default mode should be best most of the time, as it will reach higher search depths faster. The Tactical Mode can help in some study-like positions, but these are rare.
I'm not sure what to put in an Endgame mode, do you have something in mind?
Aser Huerga wrote:Robert, one more question, do you think Tactical mode is a right setting for endgames? If not, how about a Endgame mode in the near future?
Thanks.
Aser, in end games the default mode should be best most of the time, as it will reach higher search depths faster. The Tactical Mode can help in some study-like positions, but these are rare.
I'm not sure what to put in an Endgame mode, do you have something in mind?
Robert
OK, thanks. I don't have a clue about what to put in a hypothetical "Endgame Mode", but I like very much the idea of focus an engine into something in particular (endgame, king attack, etc.), it would be great as analysis tool.
Aser Huerga wrote:Robert, one more question, do you think Tactical mode is a right setting for endgames? If not, how about a Endgame mode in the near future?
Thanks.
Aser, in end games the default mode should be best most of the time, as it will reach higher search depths faster. The Tactical Mode can help in some study-like positions, but these are rare.
I'm not sure what to put in an Endgame mode, do you have something in mind?
Robert
OK, thanks. I don't have a clue about what to put in a hypothetical "Endgame Mode", but I like very much the idea of focus an engine into something in particular (endgame, king attack, etc.), it would be great as analysis tool.
When H3 is in endgame, it plays the best endgame it can.
But when it's middle-game it can focus on positional or tactic (that's why 2 modes exist).
Milton wrote:I purchased Houdini 3 yesterday and I was wondering about its use with Scorpio Bitbases.
I currently have the program configured to use Nalimov egtbs (3-5 piece). If I configure the program to use Scorpio bitbases simultaneously with the Nalimov table bases, would the net result be positive, negative, or neutral with respect to playing strength?
My computer has an I7 990x processor with 9Gb ram. Thanks!
Scorpio bitbases- like all bitbases- are loaded into the RAM memory !!!
And used in search !
Not the same thing for Nalimov TBs !
It's the same thing like in Shredder (Shredderbases+Nalimov) or Chiron (Scorpio+Nalimov/Gaviota) or Patzer or Yace or............situations.
SilvianR
That is right Ruxy. I am just glad the best chess engine in the whole world ,a.k.a Harry Handcaff Houdini supports my work. May elo points rain over him.
Cheers
Is there a difference in speed or performance using Scorpio EGBBs over Gaviota? I appreciate that there is no mate info, but does having the EGBBs in RAM improve search speed over using classical EGTBs?
Also, is there a risk that it will choose a much longer path to victory without the mate info? Ex: KQ vs KR can take up to 35 moves even with perfect play. Is there a risk of taking 52 moves as it consistently chooses winning but longer paths?
"Tactics are the bricks and sticks that make up a game, but positional play is the architectural blueprint."
don't know how good the bitbases are for analysis but for game play they don't play well at all... Even with huge material advantages the bitbases will not engage in checkmate.
