Author: scott farrell
Date: 19:11:21 09/21/02
Go up one level in this thread
On September 21, 2002 at 13:41:51, Sune Fischer wrote: Sune, Very interesting indeed. it explains why my code did poorly, in terms of it was sorting ecap in with the ncap moves, and putting lcap after everything ..... not good !!! I think I too will add these stats in, they look very useful. Scott >On September 21, 2002 at 13:17:15, Sune Fischer wrote: >> >>Type of move / % of these moves in search / % cutoffs by these moves: >>hash.......: 0.44% 93.35% >>null.......: 27.91% 76.20% >>wcap.......: 3.39% 67.11% >>ecap.......: 0.45% 60.75% >>lcap.......: 3.87% 22.38% >>kill.......: 3.10% 22.34% >>ncap.......: 60.84% 0.50% > >The above was done with a long analysis of a position, >running a game changes things, the hash is worse but the capture >sorting works better: > >hash.......: 1.09% 88.80% >null.......: 21.35% 67.28% >wcap.......: 4.97% 68.31% >ecap.......: 0.43% 43.53% >lcap.......: 4.53% 5.87% >kill.......: 2.94% 15.29% >ncap.......: 64.67% 0.43% > >Looks like killers should be tried before losing captures. > >-S.
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.