Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 11:15:59 12/05/01
Go up one level in this thread
On December 05, 2001 at 03:12:49, Russell Reagan wrote: >If I run any top chess program, eventually the program doesn't get any new best >move. Is this because the next ply is simply taking too long, or is it because >the engine isn't designed to do searches for long periods of time (like days or >weeks)? > >In other words, is it possible to write a program that is better suited for >searching to deeper depths if it were given, say, 1 year to search for the best >move? Or are current algorithms about as good as we're going to get in long term >analysis? > >Another way of phrasing this would be: Is there any difference between a program >designed to analyze completed games over long periods of time and a program that >plays chess at a shorter time interval? A program "hits the wall" for various reasons. The most common is that once you totally saturate the hash table, move ordering starts to break down and the effective branching factor grows. Also the exponential growth of the tree catches up pretty soon. If iteration N takes 1 minute, iteration N+1 takes 3-4 minutes. If iteration N takes 1 day, then ...
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.