Computer Chess Club Archives

Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Faster, deeper and more of such...

Author: Dan Ellwein

Date: 11:30:07 09/14/00

Go up one level in this thread

On September 14, 2000 at 13:42:49, Ed Schröder wrote:

>In the upcoming Rebel Century 3.0 I have implemented a little
>statistic routine that reveals something about the nature of SEARCH
>that could be important for the future of computer chess in the sense
>that it says "something" one may expect in the near future because
>of faster and faster PC's.
>
>Research on this issue have already been done by Bob and Ernst and
>it has made me curious so I have spend a little time on it. The
>statistic shows 2 things:
>
>a) number of fail-low's for each depth;
>b) number of "changed moves" for each depth.
>
>(a) is not so important as often fail-low's do not mean anything but I
>wanted to know anyway.
>
>(b) is extremely important as it shows for each depth how many times
>Rebel changed its mind. As you can see in the below statistic the %
>diminish and diminish the deeper Rebel goes.
>
>How to read the overview:
>- first column: iteration depth;
>- second column: number of times the depth was reached;
>- third column: number of fail-low's;
>- fourth column: percentage of fail-low's;
>- Fifth column: number of changed moves;
>- Last column: percentage of changed moves;
>
>SEARCH OVERVIEW
>===============
>
>1      4726         0 ( 0)        0 ( 0)
>2      4726      1000 (21)     1889 (39)
>3      4726       495 (10)     1468 (31)
>4      4719       209 ( 4)     1085 (22)
>5      4719       218 ( 4)     1222 (25)
>6      4699       191 ( 4)     1139 (24)
>7      4655       141 ( 3)      948 (20)
>8      4572       109 ( 2)      837 (18)
>9      4457        79 ( 1)      777 (17)
>10      3998        86 ( 2)      644 (16)
>11      3015        64 ( 2)      374 (12)
>12      1904        55 ( 2)      204 (10)
>13      1093        37 ( 3)       77 ( 7)
>14       584        22 ( 3)       35 ( 5)
>15       356        15 ( 4)       22 ( 6)
>16       230         7 ( 3)        6 ( 2)
>17       157         6 ( 3)        2 ( 1)
>18       123         6 ( 4)        3 ( 2)
>19        88         0 ( 0)        0 ( 0)
>20        67         0 ( 0)        1 ( 1)
>21        55         0 ( 0)        1 ( 1)
>22        54         0 ( 0)        1 ( 1)
>23        50         0 ( 0)        0 ( 0)
>24        47         0 ( 0)        0 ( 0)
>25        40         0 ( 0)        0 ( 0)
>26        30         0 ( 0)        0 ( 0)
>27        28         0 ( 0)        0 ( 0)
>28        22         0 ( 0)        0 ( 0)
>29        19         0 ( 0)        0 ( 0)
>30        14         0 ( 0)        0 ( 0)
>31        14         0 ( 0)        0 ( 0)
>32        13         0 ( 0)        0 ( 0)
>33        12         0 ( 0)        0 ( 0)
>34        12         0 ( 0)        0 ( 0)
>35        10         0 ( 0)        0 ( 0)
>36        10         0 ( 0)        0 ( 0)
>37        10         0 ( 0)        0 ( 0)
>38        10         0 ( 0)        0 ( 0)
>39        10         0 ( 0)        0 ( 0)
>40         8         0 ( 0)        0 ( 0)
>41         8         0 ( 0)        0 ( 0)
>42         5         0 ( 0)        0 ( 0)
>43         4         0 ( 0)        0 ( 0)
>44         3         0 ( 0)        0 ( 0)
>45         3         0 ( 0)        0 ( 0)
>46         2         0 ( 0)        0 ( 0)
>47         2         0 ( 0)        0 ( 0)
>48         2         0 ( 0)        0 ( 0)
>49         2         0 ( 0)        0 ( 0)
>50         2         0 ( 0)        0 ( 0)
>51         2         0 ( 0)        0 ( 0)
>52         2         0 ( 0)        0 ( 0)
>53         2         0 ( 0)        0 ( 0)
>54         2         0 ( 0)        0 ( 0)
>55         2         0 ( 0)        0 ( 0)
>56         2         0 ( 0)        0 ( 0)
>57         2         0 ( 0)        0 ( 0)
>58         2         0 ( 0)        0 ( 0)
>59         2         0 ( 0)        0 ( 0)
>60         2         0 ( 0)        0 ( 0)
>
>After iteration 19 one hardly sees any changes. One might wonder
>if a doubling in speed is still good for 50-70 elo (as often said
>here).
>
>One thing that should be added to the overview is a division in
>middle-game and end-game (I think).
>
>The overview was created by playing a 40/40 auto232 match (about
>50 games). Results are automatically kept so that a next auto232
>match the statistic is automatically updated.
>
>Also if you are playing your normal (manual) games or analyze positions
>the statistic is maintained. It would be nice to see how the statistic
>would look like after say 100,000 moves.
>
>Ed

Ed

I guess it would be impractical to run this test with opening book disabled...

(startin' with the very first move have the computer think on its own)...

but i wonder what the data would look like if you did...

it may be that there would not be a cut-off at iteration 19...

PilgrimDan

This page took 0.02 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.