Author: William Penn
Date: 17:29:45 03/14/04
Go up one level in this thread
On March 14, 2004 at 13:05:47, Michael Nolan wrote: >On March 14, 2004 at 10:34:14, William Penn wrote: >>I have often wondered the same thing, but now believe it is impossible to answer >>that question [my composition window glitch mentioned below just returned >>here!?]. Comparing strengths of programs requires extensive tests to be reliable >>[another composition window glitch here!?] such as SSDF, but it's practically >>impossible to run such tests at long time controls like we want. So I believe we >>have to settle for the test results from faster time controls [another shift of >>composition window text to the left!?] such as SSDF uses, and keep our fingers >>crossed. >>At such long time controls in infinite analysis mode another special factor >>becomes important [another composition window shift!?] too, related to how often >>the analysis is displayed in the engine window. Do we have to wait 1 hour, 2 >>hours, 10 hours, or exactly how long for the next "leg" of analysis to finish >>then deign to display the result for user to see? I find that certain engines >>are better in that regard, while others can take very long times between their >>engine window outputs. Shredder seems to be one of the best in that regard. It >>may [another composition window text shift to the left!?] also help to reduce >>hash size, which seems to make those output intervals shorter. Of course that >>runs counter to common scuttlebutt that longer time controls benefit most from >>larger hash sizes. > >Do none of the engines indicate how much time is left until publication of the >next output? None - insofar as I'm aware. WP
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.