Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Neverending story with incomplete tablebases

Author: Dieter Buerssner

Date: 11:58:05 08/15/03

Go up one level in this thread


On August 15, 2003 at 02:03:28, Johan de Koning wrote:

>On August 14, 2003 at 12:12:37, Dieter Buerssner wrote:
>
>>On August 14, 2003 at 02:51:36, Johan de Koning wrote:
>>
>>>On August 13, 2003 at 17:53:30, Dieter Buerssner wrote:
>>
>>>>What are the other good reasons for clearing TTs?
>>>
>>>1. Predictability
>>>   IMHO an engine should just search when a search is needed.
>>>   After all it is a tool, not a living creature.
>>
>>Thanks for you answer. All more or less points, I could imagine. I thought, you
>>would give perhaps one totally different point (after all, you also use very
>>small TTs compared to other programs in your engine, if we can trust what we
>>heard here - 32 or 64 Mb in Leiden this year).
>
>To be precise: 30 * 2^20 byte. :-)
>But I don't see how that connects to a "totally different" point.
>
>>This first point, I don't get however. What has searching when needed to do with
>>clearing of TTs?

It was just speculation. As you confirmed, you use less space for TTs than other
authors under similar conditions. I think most engines don't clear TTs afer each
move. So, you can see perhaps, how I came to my speculation. You do it
different.

In a game of CM posted at the WB-forum (my engine was the opponent), I
recognized another thing, that also might be related. It was some sort of
fortress pos (that saved the skin for my engine). Also evalutions were posted.
CM seemed rather clever, and the score got more drawish soon (far away from 50
moves rule, and most probably far away from a point where repetions could seem
forced from the engine point of view). My only explaination was, that you pull
the score to draw in positions, where you have a rather big material advantage,
and nothing happens to improve the pos. We speak about endgame positions, the
stage where cutoffs from TTs are most efficient. But making the score dependent
from the path does not work well together with the typical usage of TTs. But you
seem to have found a good solution for this. Perhaps, you can see, how I came to
my speculation. It seems, you do some things differently than most (all?) other
engines in a very clever way. All those points might be connected to TT, and
reasons why to clear it.

Regards,
Dieter




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.