Author: Antonio Dieguez
Date: 21:33:04 09/22/01
Go up one level in this thread
On September 23, 2001 at 00:28:03, Antonio Dieguez wrote: >On September 22, 2001 at 23:42:29, James Swafford wrote: > >>On September 22, 2001 at 22:17:06, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On September 22, 2001 at 19:08:06, Torstein Hall wrote: >>> >>>>On September 22, 2001 at 18:29:46, Andreas De Troy wrote: >>>> >> >>>If the hash tables are very big then the probability for hash collision can >>>increase and if there are enough hash collisions the result can be a bad move. >>> >>>Uri >> >>Why do you think the size of the table has any bearing on the number >>of collisions? The number of collisions is a function of the >>"uniqueness" of your key, not how many entries are in your table. >> >>Maybe my definition of a collision is different than the norm: I >>define a collision as a match of the entire key between different >>positions, not a match of the portion of the key used as a probe into >>the table. > >why not? the probability to have two position differents but seen equal with the >eyes of the hashtable depends in the portion of bits that are used in the probe. well, it doesn't matter, sorry. >Off course more time or speed can cause more colisions, and the thing is that it >could be that just one hurts the search. I use always 48 bits, nonrandoms >numbers really, I just hope that doesn't happen. > >>Either way, I don't see how making the hash table bigger increases the >>chance of a collision. Would you explain? > >With the always replace scheme, I don't see neither, at the moment. > >> >>-- >>James
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.