Author: Sune Fischer
Date: 02:40:54 12/06/01
Go up one level in this thread
On December 06, 2001 at 05:06:49, David Rasmussen wrote: >No it doesn't. How do you know? Have you done any tests yourself? No. You just >theoreticize. And falsely too, since my findings have been confirmed. I have too, didn't you read my post followup? >>Well for pawn tables I believe this is the same. Since there are so few >>different posistions, even one collision could mean a thousand collisions >>because it is reused so many times. >> > >Apparently not. Crafty has this problem. Still, it is pretty strong. Now that >Bob changes back to 64-bit keys in light of my findings, I guess it will only >get stronger, but the question is "how much stronger?". Yes I read that he he "confirmed" your results, but if you really had 300 collisions you would have a really poor pawn eval(). I think some things has changed in crafty since last Robert tested, perhaps a bad PRNG? 32 bits is enough, I'm pretty sure of it (both theoretical and emirical), unless you have too many positions. >>Huh? >>Neither me or Hyatt can confirm your findings, and since Bruce is also using > >Yes, Hyatt has. Give him more time, perhaps he will find the bug :)
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.