Author: Bert van den Akker
Date: 12:04:05 10/09/00
Go up one level in this thread
On October 09, 2000 at 06:09:53, Steve Maughan wrote: >Having managed to add all the normal stuff to my chess program (hash, SEE >sorting, null move, killers, internal iterative deepening etc) I am a little >disappointed with the depths it is reaching. At first I thought it must be poor >move ordering but I've checked that and it seems OK (I do Hash Move, Good >Captures, Killer1, Killer2, History, Bad Captures). I decided to see how long >it took to complete it's nineth ply search from the initial position. Here are >the results along with those of other programs (450 MHz P2): > >MyProgram 31 secs 6,486,200 nodes >Ikarus 15 secs 888,000 nodes >HIARCS 18 secs 677,000 nodes >Faile 50 secs 3,500,000 nodes >Crafty 17.11 8 secs 800,000 nodes >Goliath Light 0 secs 31,000!!!! >Nimzo 7.32 13 secs 3,260,000 > >A couple of points. Firstly, how on earth can Goliath search 9 ply so quickly >and using so few nodes? I can't beleive that Goliath is the most selective. > >Secondly, it would seem that Ikarus' nodes / sec are much lower than indicated >when calculated using nodes visited divided by time! > >Finally, for my program what am I doing wrong? Am I missing something? What >other forms of selectivity are coming into play here? I'm just doing a vanilla >Alpha / Beta but it's taking me ages (6 million nodes) to complete 9 ply. >Perhaps Bob could shed some light on Crafty's impressive 8 secs and only 800 kn. > Could it be my poor evaluation funtion which is only a primitive piece-square >table? > >All help appreciated! > >Regards, > >Steve Maughan Maybe you do more in the quiescence search. If you do a lot of check extensions in your quiescence search than this will increase the number of nodes a lot. BvdA
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.