Author: Peter McKenzie
Date: 19:06:46 09/01/00
Go up one level in this thread
On September 01, 2000 at 16:39:27, Ernst A. Heinz wrote: >Hi Peter, > >>>"DarkThought WCCC'99" behaves similarly (fail low in iteration 13 >>>with horrible branching factor) but searches much fewer nodes >>>overall (roughly 70% less). >> >>Interesting that for depth 11 our scores practically agreed but I used much less >>nodes than you. Then my search went really crazy! >> >>My hash table was only 10mb, not sure if this had much impact. >>I'm planning on running this again on a computer at work to see how it goes with >>a bigger hash table. Damn, i really must get around to doing that > >My remark was only an observation and not meant to imply that our >search outperformed yours -- sorry, if it sounded this way. :-( Not at all. > >I tested with 64MB transposition tables and somehow overlooked >that "LambChop" searched fewer nodes per iteration up to depth 11. >I probably misread your 1.7 million nodes as 17 million ... > >>BTW, I ordered your book last week, looking forward to reading it! > >Please enjoy! I plan to, just have to find the time to read it! > >BTW, I am really curious how long delivery of the book takes in >Australia / New Zealand. Me too, its been about 10 days so far. > >Cheers, > >=Ernst=
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.