Author: Frank Quisinsky
Date: 13:36:21 08/29/99
Go up one level in this thread
Hello Bob, >You can believe what you want, I will believe what i see in many games, log files and debug files not what other person say, but your statement is interesting for me because you are the programmer ! >and play matches any way you want. >I simply >told you that the way you are playing them is non-optimal. Ed said the same >thing. And when Ed this say and you this say and Bruce Morland and other this say and I see other results is this for me importent ! >If you think you know my program better than I do, that's fine. I writing that I say not no when the programmer say yes. But I see the games and have the data on my PC and you can the data download and you can analyses the moves ! Or I can you send your LOG files or I have all debug files form this WT-5 tournament, I can send what you will ! And I writing over this problem not before I looking in the log files and debug files. I >simply say that if you play crafty with ponder=off, you hurt it in ways you >do _not_ understand. Some other programs may be hurt in the same way. Some >may not. When you mix a program that is hurt by this with one that is not, >the results get skewed. I think we have another opinion. You think 50-100 ELO and I think on longer time control 20-40 ELO. >It _does_ affect Crafty. That I an _certain_ of. Other programs I have no >idea about, other than Ed said it hurts Rebel as well... And the ranglist with 4500 games and the elo differenz to Comet. Why do not writing over this results. This is an fact ! >You are _still_ overlooking the point. When crafty ponders, it builds up a >time 'surplus'. It can use this in creative ways, to either search longer >when the position is unclear, or when the eval drops. If it doesn't have this >'surplus' then it doesn't do these things in the same way. And with no >pondering, it won't ever have a surplus. Other assumptions made in the time >allocation are also incorrect with no pondering... Yes I say that is importent but this other timing control without ponder is not 50-100 ELO by longer time controls on an fast machine ! >So it isn't _just_ finding a better move when it ponders correctly that is the >issue here.. It is the _time saved_ on such moves that then influences _other_ >moves in the game... those you are ignoring.. >your math is bad. going from 450 to 3600 gets at most 2 plies. It takes a >factor of 3x roughly to get another ply. 10x faster is roughly two plies >deeper. My math is good Bob :-) 3 plies can an engine not found with an 3600 MHz machine. This ist not math 1x1 for me, this is complex ! When the engine on my computer an move found in ply 15 in one day then the engine must thinking more than two days for ply 16 and more then 10!!! days for ply 17 ! >And the 70 Elo works.. because the "Elo" we are talking about is _not_ >the performance against humans, it is the performance between two identical >programs but one running 2x faster. And that 2x faster program will win a >bunch more games, yet against humans the difference won't be nearly as >dramatic... I must thinking over this. Or make I an error ? >Just note that I pointed out that you are looking _only_ at the moves that >were pondered correctly. The time saved affects _every other move_ in the >game in different ways. If you play thru the whole game with 2x the time per >move, you will find many places where it would have changed its mind if it had >had a little more time, which it would have had had pondering been enabled... Yes I think also, but I could not believe that this is 50-100 ELO ! And I looked all games in the log and winboard debug files from Crafty / Winboard ! Robert, I make an analyses under Chess-Base with Crafty Winboard games from me. I give Crafty 4 minutes pro move (in my games 40 moves in 40 minutes). I will see the moves from Crafty with 4 minutes ! I will thinking over your statement and over my opinion. Kind regards Frank
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.