Author: blass uri
Date: 21:10:36 06/28/00
Go up one level in this thread
On June 28, 2000 at 23:58:59, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On June 28, 2000 at 12:48:10, ujecrh wrote: > >> >>I am still exploring some ideas and before doing anything that is already known >>to be useless I prefer asking here if it is worth it: >> >>Some programs are known to be good blitz players and other seem to prefer longer >>time controls. One of the reasons for it might be that the amount of knowledge >>in the evaluation. I wonder if anybody did (or does) try to use more or less >>knowledge depending on the time controls ? >> >>Same idea for hardware speed. Recent posts stated that some new strong engines >>might be weaker on slow hardware than older ones. Many programs evaluate >>computer speed when started, do they tweak their evaluation according to this ? >> >>(I am just talking here about eval and not search. The fact that some search >>techniques benefit more than others of faster machines has already been >>discussed here) >> >> >>Ujecrh > > >I would suggest two points: > >(1) the evaluation for a slow machine is not necessarily the same evaluation >I would write for a fast machine. The fast machine will be aware of more >tactical things, relieving the eval of noticing some things. > >(2) the search for a slow machine is not necessarily the same search I would >write for a fast machine. > >In short, the program for a fast machine is not necessarily the same as a >program for slower hardware. I think that the program can calculate a number (nodes per move) in the begininng of the game and decide about the evaluation and the search rules based on this number. Uri
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.