Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 10:51:25 02/28/00
Go up one level in this thread
On February 28, 2000 at 09:17:48, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >On February 28, 2000 at 08:49:06, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On February 28, 2000 at 03:25:09, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >> >>>On February 27, 2000 at 18:00:32, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>I don't believe this can be safely overlooked, because the wrong repetition >>>>value is a tiny part of a much bigger problem, that of not correctly hashing >>>>positions... the former may not happen often. The latter happens thousands >>>>of times every search. Often enough that it will _definitely_ affect the >>>>root score enough to make a difference. >>> >>>I would like to see some numbers to back up your argument. >>> >>>-Tom >> >> >>3, 47.5, 2.71828, 3.14159265358979323846264, and -.2 >> >>All you have to do is run with and without EP hashed into your signature to > >Exactly. I'd like you to do this [again]. And post some test suite scores >comparing the two, or something. > >I know for a fact that some of the best programs don't hash this stuff, and they >don't seem to be hurting _nearly_ as much as you suggest. > >-Tom Who isn't including EP status in the hash signature? I can't imagine _anyone_ not doing this. It leads to simple failures that are easy to predict.
This page took 0.01 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.