Author: Uri Blass
Date: 19:49:25 04/13/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 13, 2001 at 22:45:43, Uri Blass wrote: >On April 13, 2001 at 20:54:46, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On April 13, 2001 at 00:40:47, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>It is possible to play gmaes at fixed depth under Deep Fritz. >>> >>>Did someone try to play tournament between engines at fixed depth in order to >>>find out which engine earns more from getting more plies and if there is a >>>diminishing return from bigger depth? >> >> >>This is trivial to solve by induction. If program A can search to depth=15 >>in 3 minutes, and program B can search to depth=6 in 3 minutes, and the two >>programs are "equal" at 3 minutes per move, then the program that can only >>search to depth=6 is going to get more for each ply than the one that can >>get to 15. Simple induction. > >No >It is not clear. >Even if you assume that the programs are equal at all time controls > >It is also possible that the 2 programs have the same branching factor when >program A needs time for the first iteration. > >There was a claim that programs with smaller branching factor are better >programs and that Genius was bad at long time control because of bad branching >factor. > >I think that the main problem of Genius at long time control was the fact that >it did not do extensions of more than 12 plies. Unfortunately It cannot be checked easily because of the fact that Genius is not a fritz engine so I believe that the only way to do matches at fixed depth between Ganius and other programs is by playing manually. Uri > >I do not say that I can learn from the experiment which program earns more from >time but I can learn more information if I have also the branching factor of the >programs at different depthes. > >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.