Author: Uri Blass
Date: 13:26:39 12/19/00
Go up one level in this thread
On December 19, 2000 at 13:39:53, Christophe Theron wrote: >On December 19, 2000 at 13:13:27, Mogens Larsen wrote: > >>On December 19, 2000 at 12:19:13, Christophe Theron wrote: >> >>>On December 19, 2000 at 06:52:08, Mogens Larsen wrote: >>>>It's not an especially fast program, around 160Knps on my Athlon, but quite >>>>selective or so it seems. That could be a problem at faster timecontrols. >>> >>> >>> >>>Why? Can you explain your reasonning? >>> >>> >>> >>> Christophe >> >>No, I don't think I can, given that I'm not sufficiently knowledgable about the >>program. Maybe the evaluation leaves it vulnerable to tactics at shorter time >>controls, I don't know. >> >>Mogens. > > > >As far as I know, the speed (in term of NPS) of a program is not an indicator of >its favorite time control. For example, Hiarcs is a very slow program, but it >performs extremely well at very fast time controls. It is the opposite for >CSTal. > >The level of selectivity is not a good indicator either. The King and Hiarcs are >very selective (they have to, as they are also very slow in NPS), and as I >pointed out, Hiarcs is very good at blitz. I don't know if the King shows any >preference for a given time control. > >Tiger is a very selective program, and it does not favor a time control over >another one. > >I would add that the presumed level of "knowledge" of a program does not >indicate either the time control it will excel in. Once again, Hiarcs is >supposed to have a lot of knowledge, and once again it performs the best at >blitz. Which is not to say that it is bad a long time controls. > >And finally over the years I have noticed that some programs have a clear >preference for fast time controls (Genius, Hiarcs...), but nobody has ever been >able to show that a program had a preference for long (or very long) time >controls. People say they have the impression that program X plays better at >long time controls, but it is never proven by further testings. > > > > Christophe I think that it is interesting to know which program has preference for very long time control. Doing games takes a long time and I think that a good estimate that will be correct most of the time can be done by test suites. The question is which program earn more right solutions from time. It is better to use a secret test suite so programmers will not tune their program for the test suite so Enrique's secret test suite is a good candidate. Having more positions that are more hard to solve is also a good idea because when the hardware gets better Enrique test suite becomes more easy. 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.