Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 17:14:30 03/06/04
Go up one level in this thread
On March 06, 2004 at 20:02:13, GeoffW wrote: >Hi Dan > >Thanks for the extensive analysis, that was a lot of output so I summarised the >times to avoid the obvious Bishop takes rook > > >Amy-net-087............00:16 >Aristarch 4.41.........00:02 >DeepSjeng..............00:04 >Delfi-440..............00:13 >Dragon_45..............01:23 >ELChinito 3.25.........00:06 >Glc300.................00:05 >Gothmog................01:31 >Kke-253................00:08 >Ktulu..................00:23 >List512................00:04 >Patzer 3.61.......... >00:35 not resolved >Quark-232-net..........00:53 >Ruffian_202............00:03 >Ruffian_210........... 00:04 >Smarthink-017a.........00:10 >Yace...................01:06 >Shredder 7.04..........00:03 > > >This is seemingly a good test position to separate the elite programs from the >merely good ones, the real top programs can see and resolve this threat in less >than 5 seconds. > >I have only got to improve my program by a factor of 300 to get there, Arrrrrgh >! > >It looks as though my program is the only one that really suffers from a nodes >explosion though. > >I will do some experimenting on this tomorrow, maybe put some output in to try >and see what extensions are adding lots of nodes. I will try a few tests with >different features switched off to see if that makes a difference too ? > >>Interesting position. I would like to be white here, for sure. Great space >>advantage and extremely dangerous king attack possibilities. >> >>Most top engines seem to go through similar ideas about the position as yours >>does. >> >>What sort of hardware were you using? > >P4 1.6 Ghz running at 2.4 Ghz 512 Meg Ram (64Meg Hash table) >Yes, chess programs do make it get a tad overheated !! > > >> >>What sort of techniques are used in your chess engine? >> >judging from this test position, not eough of the correct or intelligent >techniques I would say :-) > >Joking apart, my program is TSCP + some code optimisations + 0x88 board + Null >Moves + Hash table + killer moves + some rudimentary extensions and pruning > >Pretty standard stuff, it is quite surprising how much stronger TSCP can be made >just from the above additions but with almost the same evaluation function. Do you use internal iterative deepening? It is very simple to implement, and helps a great deal in move ordering. It takes just 3 or 4 lines of code. In case you don't, for a good example that is easy to understand, see Olithink 4.1.3. If you have any loops with the number 64 in them, then you need a piece list. It will make your program 3 times faster with a full board and many times faster when the board is sparse.
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.