Author: Tom Kerrigan
Date: 22:10:52 05/30/00
Go up one level in this thread
On May 30, 2000 at 21:48:52, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>All I'm saying is that the numbers you gave (e.g. 25%) are (hash hits/hash >>probes) and not (hash hits/nodes). The latter is what's more important in this >>case. >> >>-Tom > > >That number would be meaningless. Of course you can't "hit" if you don't >"probe". Who would care? I only want to know what percentage of the time I >get a hit after doing a probe... which seems like the only reasonable measure >of anything. If a program probes in the q-search, those numbers would match >mine _exactly_ since in his case, probes == nodes. No, that number would NOT be meaningless. Sure, if you are trying to gague the effectiveness of a hash entry replacement scheme, it makes more sense to measure hits/probes. But in this case, "we" need to find out how many times the hash move can short-circuit move generation. So unless you don't generate moves in qsearch() either, the number is important. -Tom
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.