Author: Uri Blass
Date: 12:06:14 09/18/00
Go up one level in this thread
On September 18, 2000 at 13:56:14, Dann Corbit wrote: >On September 18, 2000 at 13:50:51, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On September 18, 2000 at 12:48:48, Dann Corbit wrote: >> >>>On September 17, 2000 at 14:49:23, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: >>> >>>>[D]N1bk2nr/pp1p1ppp/2n5/8/1b6/5B1q/PPPN1P1P/R1BQK2R >>>> >>>>EPD data: >>>> >>>>N1bk2nr/pp1p1ppp/2n5/8/1b6/5B1q/PPPN1P1P/R1BQK2R b KQ - acd 16; acn 509064473; a >>>>cs 12875; ce 53; pv Nf6 a3 Re8+ Be2 Ba5 b4 Qg2 bxa5 Nd4 Rf1 b5 axb6 Rxe2+ Qxe2 N >>>>xe2 Kxe2 Qxa8 bxa7 Qxa7; >>>> >>>>I would like to post the complete log here but I'm having trouble pasting it >>>>into Netscape and Lynx. Any hints? >>>> >>>>Software: Crafty 17.13 with dynamic nullmove pruning, tuned down extensions and >>>>razoring >>>> >>>>Dann, if this data is usefull for you tell me and I'll run a few more. >>> >>>Actually, the EPD record is far more useful to me than the log. I will have to >>>reformulate the log data into EPD format, so this is exactly what I am after. >>> >>>I now clearly owe GCP a poem. >>>;-) >> >>I believe that big part of the results without dynamic null move pruning are >>different. >> >>The main problem is not zunzwangs but cases when the null move pruning prune >>line that has a deep threat. >> >>I also believe that extensions are important and 15 plies with the normal >>extensions may be better for analysis than 16 plies when you tune down >>extensions and razoring. >> >>If you want good analysis of the position the best thing to do is to ask the top >>programs to use a long time and not to goto big depth. > >How will you go a long time without getting big depth? >How will you get big depth without going a long time? You can get bigger depth in shorter time by using less extensions. I understand that this is exactly what Gian did if I understand correctly the words "tuned down extensions and razoring". You can get bigger depth by using Fritz and not Hiarcs but Fritz's depth is not the same as Hiarcs depth and the proof is that hiarcs can solve more test positions at the same depth. > >I suspect that any 16 ply depth will take several hours to compute at least. >Some of the problems I posted will probably take weeks if they can be solved at >all. If I remember correctly the 16 plies of Fritz6a took less than 1 hour for mark young(I guess that Fritz does more pruning). 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.