Sorry, but using a computer for improvement seems like a bad idea to me.
I want an explanation of why I am doing things. Even if the move is not as good as another, at least I know why I am doing it and I will be able to do it in the future an adapt it and improve it.
Knowing the best move on a position with a 30 movements deepth but not being able to know why it is good it's useless.
But each to their own.
I wasn't too impress with these lessons. "Tarrasch-Schlechter, Leipzig 1894" from "Silman's Lessons in Strategy 1" (http://www.chess.com/chessmentor/view_lesson?id=2445) in particular was very far from accurate if you look at suggestions made by Houdini. So if you score 100%, you did not find the best outcome. - Then what's the point of the scoring if you have a better solution but you have to find the weaker moves...