Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 17:15:15 12/10/02
Go up one level in this thread
On December 10, 2002 at 13:25:55, Jeremiah Penery wrote: >On December 10, 2002 at 12:21:33, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On December 10, 2002 at 11:34:45, Jeremiah Penery wrote: >> >>>It came from the original data in this thread: >> >>So? That is over 6 positions. Using that to prove that a program searches >>"fewer >>nodes with mt=2" is total nonsense, as is the claim that a program +will+ search >>fewer nodes overall using two threads. It simply doesn't happen. And it falls >>in >>the same class as the perpetual-motion machine... It doesn't work... > >I'm not trying to prove anything. But for you to say Vincent is hand-waving is >a bit much, since he's actually referring to some real data. This is 6 >positions worth of data, when all the tests you did the other day were only >using 5 positions. So you claim one test is meaningless, and the other isn't? Several positions, run _several_ times, and averaged together to smooth out the variation... Big difference...
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.