Author: James Robertson
Date: 11:25:55 03/22/99
Go up one level in this thread
On March 22, 1999 at 14:01:02, KarinsDad wrote: >On March 22, 1999 at 12:57:32, blass uri wrote: > >> >>On March 22, 1999 at 12:41:44, James T. Walker wrote: >> >>>Last night I ran the 2nd 100 games at game/5 minutes between Crafty 16.5 with >>>and without tabelbases in an attempt to determine the value of the tabelbases. >>>It is almost like an instant replay. 2nd 100 games score: >>> >>>First 50 Crafty w/tb +16 =20 -14 = 26 to 24 >>>Second 50 "" " +13 =21 -16 = 23.5 to 26.5 >>>Second 100 games " Total = 49.5 to 50.5 >>>Total for 200 games Crafty with tb =100.5 to 99.5 >>> >>>I only have the 3/4 man tablebases and about 6 of the 5 man tabelbases. Most >>>notably absent is the KRPKR tablebases. I can't generate them on my computer >>>and AOL will not leave me alone long enough to download them. [:-) >>>So far it looks like the tablebases are useless !? >> >>It is not clear >>maybe at longer time control they start to be productive >> >>Uri > >This seems like the most reasonable explanation. In faster times, the time lost >doing hard disk lookups may be offset by the Crafty which is not doing the >lookup having more time to analyze to a reasonable level.' > >Also, how many of the games were lost by the tablebase version losing on time >versus the non-tablebase version losing on time? > >James, you may want to try it with G30 (or slower) games where the 30 seconds >average per move can make up for 5 seconds of searching a hard drive. My guess >is that your results will be more different in that case. > >KarinsDad Another reason why slower games may be better is that the level of play is higher, and there will be fewer games won in the middlegame. James
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.