Author: David Rasmussen
Date: 14:52:11 12/05/00
Go up one level in this thread
On December 05, 2000 at 15:21:02, Miguel A. Ballicora wrote: > >Too much of an introduction. My question is: >How do you realize that your hash table is efficiently coded? >from the initial position into ply 7 or 8 I have ~4-5% of the nodes >hit in the hash table (position was found) but only ~10% of those hits (0.5% >total) can be used to return a value (depth stored is >= than depth). >Are these numbers reasonable? >If I use two tables, one for overwriting always and the other to overwrite >only if depth >= depth stored it does not change much. > >If the numbers are not reasonable, what would you try to change or debug? > When I was first implementing hashtables, I was displeased with the hit success percentage I got. about 5-10% in the middlegame. And about 30-60% in the endgame. Compared to Crafty, that sucked. After much thinking I realized that I had forgotten to store in the hashtable after a nullmove search with a beta cutoff. Adding this mad my hash hit percentage go to 15-40% in the middlegame, and about 50-90% in the endgame. Also, when I tried to disable the hashstoring for beta cutoff by nullmove in Crafty, I saw hashrates dropping to levels comparable to where my program was before. I think this is important, and I don't know if I was stupid to make that error, but people almost never mention this source of error.
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.