Author: blass uri
Date: 15:45:56 05/26/00
Go up one level in this thread
On May 26, 2000 at 17:49:10, Mogens Larsen wrote: >On May 26, 2000 at 16:56:15, blass uri wrote: > >>This was only an example. >>The difference in the evaluation can be big in another example. > >Yes, but it wouldn't be unreasonable to assume that a few moves would be within >0.2 at blitz time control. > >>You could divide the times by 10 and in this case it is important for blitz > >No, you can't just divide with ten. It's not that simple. > >>I do not see difference between 5 minutes per game and 50 minutes per game. >>in 5 minutes per game you can reach only iteration 8 and 9 instead of 10 and 11 >>but it does not change the fact that the same thing can happen. > >The lower the iteration equals less likelyhood of chosing the best move. If we >were sure that programs would choose the best move at iteration 8 then iteration >11 wouldn't matter, but that's not the case. So the extra time doesn't matter >that much. The point is choosing a better move and not choosing the best move. We are never sure that program choose the best move but in most of the cases they choose a better move when they change their mind and I have no reason to believe that choosing a better move is more common at depth 11 than at depth 8. The opposite. Diminishing returns suggests that the case that the new move is better in blitz is more common. Uri
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.