Author: David Rasmussen
Date: 06:16:32 12/20/01
Go up one level in this thread
On December 20, 2001 at 07:31:02, Severi Salminen wrote: >>96-99% is incredibly high - it's hard to believe, actually. > >I'd gladly post the sources, but...nope ;) I had thought that 95% is a normal >figure but it seems to be high, I'm not complaining though! I checked the code >and it seems to OK: I increase moves_searched after I have really searched a >legal move (futile and illegal moves don't count as they are not searched) and >then I increase FailHighCount and FirstMoveFail counters as necessary. And now I >removed the code from qsearch, which might have biased the figures (well, it >didn't). I'm using PVS and SEE (the latter of course has a great impact on move >ordering). > >>Could you post the test position you're using? > >It's the position after 1.e4 e5 2.d4 d5: > >[D] rnbqkbnr/ppp2ppp/8/3pp3/3PP3/8/PPP2PPP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - 0 1 > >>It would also be nice to know if >>these numbers are repeatable over a large set of positions. > >I have not yet implemented test suite processing, but I can test individual >positions of course. From initial position, the percentage was 94%. > Which is also incredibly high. Esp. without hashtables.
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.