Author: Dan Andersson
Date: 10:36:10 05/30/01
Go up one level in this thread
The test methodology should depend on what you test. If for example you make a change in the code that should have no impact on search, you could check this by either computing a checksum for the search (per ply or whatever) or dump the search in a file and compare with a previous non changed run. You could even combine both and only save the search if the checksum differs. If you want to check search efficiency, you should have a large amount of test positions (preferably non tactical, and from all phases of the game) and make an automated report of the changed search metrics. If you want to check tactical prowess you should run a tactical suite (preferably change the suite at intervals to avoid over training). If you want to improve your programs weak play in certain kinds of positions, you should save the offending position or positions and routinely re-run them to see if your program avoids the mistakes it did before. This kind of self testing is very beneficial, and prevents regression, as long as you are certain the plan/knowledge is non productive (if you're not a good enough chessplayer find any player with, say, elo >2000 and ask him). Why not send some standard games Hossa lost for review at FICS teaching ladder, or to me for that matter (I like to analyse games, not blitz games though. It helps me become a better player.) Regards Dan Andersson
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.