Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Opionion needed:Zobrist type 1 error

Author: Ralf Elvsén

Date: 03:33:00 07/02/00

Go up one level in this thread


On July 02, 2000 at 06:04:50, TEERAPONG TOVIRAT wrote:

>>Yes, sure, you are right, and I think I do understand it quite well.
>>I just wanted to say, that the resulting approximate formula for the
>>error probability depends on N and H, and not on P (IMO).
>
>Thanks for your interest to my post. No one besides you seems to do so.
>Perhaps it's too difficult for me to express  the third factor (P/H ) in
>detail(English).
>Let me try. Do you notice N and H are relatively constant or controlled
>by limitation of RAM ?  In my hypothesis I base on assumption that every
>hash value has approximately equal number of positions,but I think in
>the actual situation is different. I don't know about the real distribution.
>I know only  a lot of people here say " not all random numbers are suitable
>for hash value  some of  them leading to clash so often than others" .
>So, the third factor should be the real number of positions that have the
>same hash value not just by approximation.  And now if my hypothesis
>is correct.  Will it be useful? As I said above we cannot control N,H.
>I think we can detect a good series of random numbers by using these facts.
>In last few days I spent hours in experiment about this. I test my checkers
>program
>with 32 bit hash table. The results are quite the same as I expect.
>At the early stage of game the incidence of  the type 1 error is so small.
>As the number of positions occupied on the table increase the incidence
>also increases until the table is fully occupied the incidence tend to be
>stable at some constant. My current problem is my incidence of error is
>higher than I expect. I got 0.5% instead of 1/4000. Do you think I can blame
>it on my random integers?  or Do you have any idea to generate a good series
>of random number?
>I'm sorry it's quite a long post.
>
>Thanks,
>Teerapong

Are you using "any" random numbers? When I experimented with a hash table
I got a significant performance improvement when I used a collection of
random numbers that were selected for their average mutual
"Hamming distance" . There has been some discussion about this,
but maybe you are aware of this already.

Ralf
that were



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.