Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 11:56:02 09/26/01
Go up one level in this thread
On September 26, 2001 at 14:40:53, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: >On September 26, 2001 at 13:05:43, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>I really don't want to test with smaller keys. When I tried 32 bits in the >>tests Stanback, I and others did, it was horrible. Collisions per second. I >>didn't think the search could stand that. However, I have never tried to >>determine how many collisions (replace this with bogus scores) the search can >>tolerate with no ill side-effects. That would be a _very_ good paper. Which I >>suppose I will write if nobody else does... > >For some anecdotal data: > >Sjeng has been using 32-bits for normal chess for quite some time >and I don't seem to crash & burn (*). Didn't seem to change much going >from the cyrix120 to the Athlon 1000 either. > >However! If I use a large openings book and do not disable probing >it after the opening I _have_ gotten collisions and several times >so! (and unfortunately in that case a _single_ collision will absolutely >kill you) > >(*) I discovered recently that in about 5-15% of the cases I was >getting bogus evaluations back in crazyhouse chess due to a hashing >error. It _was_ producing bogus scores in the search, but 'fixing' >it doesn't seem to have affected the strength of my program. Amazing >isn't it? > >-- >GCP The last thing is interesting. Still has my curiousity up to see just how many "errors" are required before the search falls apart.
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.