2014
DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.2415203
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Method for Comparing Chess Openings

Abstract: ABSTRACT. A quantitative method is described for comparing chess openings. Test openings and baseline openings are run through chess engines under controlled conditions and compared to evaluate the effectiveness of the test openings. The results are intuitively appealing and in some cases they agree with expert opinion. The specific contribution of this work is the development of an objective measure that may be used for the evaluation and refutation of chess openings, a process that had been left to thought e… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 5 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, computers have also challenged and refuted some openings from the past. Munshi (2014) notes that out of the ten opening innovations tested, five were found to weaken rather than strengthen the innovator's position. Notably, popular gambit lines such as the King's Gambit and the Evan's Gambit, once favored by past World Champions, are now rarely employed at the highest level due to the computer engines' ability to expose their inherent weaknesses.…”
Section: Opening Theorymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, computers have also challenged and refuted some openings from the past. Munshi (2014) notes that out of the ten opening innovations tested, five were found to weaken rather than strengthen the innovator's position. Notably, popular gambit lines such as the King's Gambit and the Evan's Gambit, once favored by past World Champions, are now rarely employed at the highest level due to the computer engines' ability to expose their inherent weaknesses.…”
Section: Opening Theorymentioning
confidence: 99%