25,161
edits
Changes
no edit summary
Like human players, the program had a large number of stored "patterns", and analyzing a position involved matching these patterns to suggest [[Planning|plans]] for attack or defense. By communicating plans down the [[Search Tree|tree]], the analysis was verified and possibly corrected by a small [[Search|search]] of the game tree (tens of positions) inluding specialized causality facility and [[Quiescence Search|quiescence search]] <ref>[https://www.stmintz.com/ccc/index.php?id=348861 Comparison: Paradise and Symbolic] by [[Steven Edwards]], [[CCC]], February 13, 2004</ref>. There were production rules to produce plans, implementing such concepts as [[Checkmate|checkmate]], [[Double Attack|fork]], [[Skewer|skewer]], and [[Trapped Pieces|trapping]] the piece, etc..
A plan generator produced tactical plans in a Plan Language. The program is capable of finding very deep [[Combination|combinations because]] no limit is placed on its [[Depth|search depth]]. It searches for moves as long as a plan is continuing to work <ref> [[Tristan Caulfield]] ('''2004'''). ''Acquiring and Using Knowledge in Computer Chess''. B.Sc. Computer Science, [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Bath University of Bath], [http://opuswww.cs.bath.ac.uk/16854~mdv/courses/CM30082/projects.bho/12003-4/CSBU TristanCaulfieldDissertation.pdf pdf], 4.2.2 PARADISE, pp. 12</ref>.
=Win at Chess=
