Author: Brian Richardson
Date: 15:28:51 04/08/00
Go up one level in this thread
On April 08, 2000 at 15:10:35, Severi Salminen wrote: >Hi! > >>Congratulations on getting your program playing. > >Thanx! > >> >>Try adding piece square tables to your evaluation function--see TSCP >>source for simple examples. This will make it much easier to direct >>opening play and piece development. > > >Well, I found the error (it's not so easy with assembler...) and now my program >plays 1...e6 and I'm satisfied so far. > >BTW how fast "should" the program be? Mine calculates now some 40000 positions >with Celeron 300Mhz. Is the NPS rating the actual number of positions evaluated >per second or is it the total number (even those cut off with A-B)? > >Severi NPS is calculated differently in many programs, but I think it is generally the total number of nodes visited during the search, but not including evaluations, (which would be already counted as leaf nodes). NPS is not very useful as a speed measure. However, it is useful to the programmer to compare various versions of the same program. A more useful measure of speed would be the time to reach certain depths for several test positions (starting, various midgame, endgame). You could then compare your program's speed against several others that you could download. TSCP would generally be the slowest, and you should shoot for about 10x its speed. Crafty would be among the faster ones (but not fastest). PS Since you will soon (if not already) be spending most of your time debugging and testing, you may want to switch to C going forward.
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.