Author: Andrew Williams
Date: 02:05:47 08/27/00
Go up one level in this thread
On August 26, 2000 at 23:09:57, Will Singleton wrote: >On August 26, 2000 at 15:52:38, Andrew Williams wrote: > >>On August 26, 2000 at 12:44:46, Will Singleton wrote: >> >>>On August 26, 2000 at 08:06:00, Brian Richardson wrote: >>> >>>>I think the information that many programs report, such as depth, score, PV, >>>>etc) is helpful to see, and appreciate most programs doing so (particuarly when >>>>their operators are online, or even some that have lists of opponents to >>>>automatically kibitz). >>>> >>>>However, each program reports in a different manner. I would like to propose >>>>_some_ reporting uniformity. I am not suggesting that standardizing _all_ >>>>information and formats should be attempted. >>>> >>>>In particular, the search "depth" seems like a good place to start. Depth can >>>>mean several different things. I would like to propose a depth reporting format >>>>as follows: >>>> >>>>ply x(y/z) where x is the last full width (normal search) ply _completed_, >>>>z is the deepest with extensions, and z is the absolute deepest ply reached >>>>(typically in q-search). >>>> >>> >>>I assume you mean y = deepest with extensions. >>> >>>I don't know about standardizing. I sort of like to compare the different >>>formats, you get to know the idiosyncrasies of each after awhile. Your format >>>is unique I think, kind of verbose. Others give a single number, like d=8, >>>which is too sparse. I like my method (surprise :)), that gives the depth >>>reached plus number of ply 1 moves examined at that depth. That shows exactly >>>where in the ply the search terminated. >>> >> >>This isn't possible with mtd engines. Yeah, I know there aren't many. >> > >Hmmm... guess I haven't been paying attention. You mean to say that you don't >know how many root moves you've searched at a given ply? Yes. At a given ply it will do several searches, each of which is trying to decide if the true score for the position is higher or lower than a guess. So the root moves can be searched multiple times. For my analysis mode under xboard, I report something like: [+180 <= +194 <= +200] to indicate progress. That means that PM has established that the score >=+180 and <= +200 and its current guess is +194. > >>>I also like the score shown with a bit less resolution (1.1 rather than 1.13). >>>Less is more. I should also fix my kib feature. >>> >>>Will >> >>I like to see the score with either + or - prepended. But I also prefer 1.13 >>to 1.1 <shrug> > > >For my own purposes, a resolution in hundreths is hard to assign meaning to. My >eval jumps around a bit, while yours seems more steady. Have you tried >thousandths? :) > >Will My program evaluates in centipawns. I should say that I've never really given any thought to emitting this info in tenths. I just shoved the kibitz/whisper feature in a few weeks ago. Andrew
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.