Author: Uri Blass
Date: 02:31:27 09/01/01
Go up one level in this thread
On September 01, 2001 at 05:09:40, Christophe Theron wrote: >On September 01, 2001 at 04:00:15, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On September 01, 2001 at 01:18:21, Christophe Theron wrote: >> >>>On August 31, 2001 at 16:05:48, Peter Berger wrote: >>> >>>>On August 31, 2001 at 13:05:35, Christophe Theron wrote: >>>> >>>>>It does not make any sense to talk about "optimizing for 386 or 486 tournament >>>>>time controls". >>>> >>>>How come ? It makes perfect sense IMHO : the conclusion ( and a very possible >>>>one) is that it never existed - if this conclusion ( or any other one btw) is >>>>reached it was useful to talk about it as a problem that obviously was of >>>>interest to some ( they took the effort to post ) was there and was resolved . >>>>People who think it is futile can keep away from the thread or ask for >>>>moderation if they think it hurts their general reading experience. People who >>>>have valuable information and feel like joining can provide it and help the less >>>>knowledgeable. If someone has no new information, opinions or questions he can >>>>still read and learn as long as interested. >>>> >>>>I sometimes think this policy could be useful in some of the Deep Blue threads >>>>also. >>>> >>>>And I don't see I suggested anything that contradicts your statement anywhere >>>>anyway - as I agree to your opinion. >>>> >>>>> >>>>>It would take years to achieve a task like this, and while this optimization job >>>>>would take place the author would not be able to make any serious change in his >>>>>program. >>>> >>>>Maybe your opinion is too extreme here ( or better your idea how such an >>>>optimization might happen) . It might be more about ways of testing . An extreme >>>>example : an author tests every major change he makes in 1000 1/0 bullet games >>>>against GNU on his dedicated test computer . The engine might end up being >>>>overtuned for being successful against GNU in the end - and it is conceivable it >>>>will be stronger in Bullet games than at slower time controls. >>>> >>>>I have read a few posts from chess programmers and beta-testers that explained >>>>how they do their tests and I think some of them seemed to show something that >>>>points into a similar direction but I am not the right person to discuss this. >>>> >>>>> >>>>>An author simply tries to make his program stronger, and that's already a task >>>>>difficult enough, from the human point of view. >>>>> >>>>>I do not know of any improvement that would be a blitz improvement only (I mean >>>>>an improvement that would only help in blitz and not at longer time controls). >>>>>Likewise, I do not know any improvement that would only help at long time >>>>>controls. >>>> >>>>I think some of the things Genius _seems_ to do might be better in blitz than in >>>>longer games- for example the way it seems to evaluate some pawn structures , >>>>but I won't fall in the trap to talk about things I don't really understand and >>>>won't go on . >>> >>> >>> >>>I have a simpler explanation: Genius is handicapped at longer time controls >>>because of its higher branching factor. >> >>being handicapped at longer time control is the same as being oprimized for >>blitz. >> >>If you are interested in doing a good program for blitz you care less about the >>branching factor. >> >>Uri > > > >No because a better branching factor also works in blitz. > >The effects are more obvious at long time controls, but the effects at blitz are >not negligible. > >If you are interested in improving your program, it's something to work on >whatever time controls you have in mind. Note that I did not say do not care about the branching factor but care less about the branching factor. If you have 2 ideas to improve your program when you expect one of them to give 50 elo improvment and the other one only 40 elo improvement and you have not time to work on both of them then it is logical to go for the 50 elo improvement. If you are interested in longer time control and the 40 elo is now 70 elo then it is logical not to go for the 50 elo improvement. 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.