Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 04:41:00 04/13/03
Go up one level in this thread
On April 13, 2003 at 00:14:52, Omid David Tabibi wrote: may i remind you that many programs use R=3 basically with exception sometimes of the nullmove of depthleft == 4. I'm doing more in qsearch than you do. Further your verification search is using R=3 too with a bug in the hashtables management. Because of that bug which is that you do not store in hashtables whether a search result is based upon a verification or not, the worst case performance of verification search is R=3. Best regards, Vincent >On April 12, 2003 at 22:45:19, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >>On April 12, 2003 at 13:20:51, Omid David Tabibi wrote: >> >>>On April 12, 2003 at 10:02:43, Uri Blass wrote: >>> >>>>On April 12, 2003 at 09:17:31, Omid David Tabibi wrote: >>>> >>>>>Quite an interesting read Vincent. >>>>> >>>>>I'm afraid you are investing too much in the parallel speedup though. Any >>>>>hardware speedup will be linear (at best) while algorithmic enhancements are >>>>>exponential. If you manage to search one ply deeper by an algorithmic >>>>>improvement, the gain will be more than any parallel speedup can yield. >>>> >>>>I agree that the hardware speedup from parallel search will be linear at best >>>>but linear improvement is not always less than one ply. >>> >>>Diep is already parallel. I assume that he will get far less than a 4x speedup >>>for his latest work on massive parallelism. Assuming an effective branching >>>factor of 4, that speedup will equal one ply. >> >>b.f. = 2.9 > >Because you are using standard R=3; but is the search reliable? That bf will not >be of much use if it causes Diep to find the correct move two plies later in >comparison to its competitors. When was the last time you compared Diep's >performance to other engines using test suites? > >BTW, I can get even a smaller branching factor than yours in no time. I will >just use standard R=6 :) > > > >> >>> >>> >>>> >>>>If the number of processors is big then it can be more than one ply. >>>> >>>>I believe that it is possible to get a lot more than one ply by pruning and >>>>extensions but I decided that I prefer first to improve movei's evaluation and >>>>only later to improve movei by better pruning and extensions because evaluation >>>>is one of the things that is used in decisions about pruning and extensions. >>>> >>>>I believe that Movei's main problem in games with programs at similiar strength >>>>is in the endgame so I will probably do some improvement in that stage before >>>>going back to search. >>>> >>>>Uri
This page took 0.01 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.