Author: Michel Langeveld
Date: 03:49:09 12/31/01
Go up one level in this thread
On December 31, 2001 at 05:37:33, Matthias Gemuh wrote:
>On December 31, 2001 at 05:26:11, Michel Langeveld wrote:
>
>>I want to check how efficient Nullmover is.
>
>
>Divide "fail_highs_on_first_move" by "total_fail_highs".
>I score about 88% ordering on BWTC test suite. This is not good enough.
>Others seem to get over 95%. Tell me what you get.
>
>Regards,
>Matthias.
I think the way you and Dann postes to measure fail highes is the same isn't it?
for (int i=0; i< ml.number; i++)
{
totalMoves++;
doWhiteMove(ml.moves[i]);
val = -qsearchBlack(-beta, -alpha);
restoreWhiteMove(ml.moves[i]);
if (val >= beta)
{
//count the scores
betaCounter++;
if ( i == 0) firstMoveWasBest++;
betaCounterNth += i+1;
return beta;
}
if (val > alpha)
{
alpha = val;
}
}
I get 93% in a complete 10 ply search in this position, that took me 56.51
seconds.
[D]rnbqkbnr/ppp2ppp/8/3pp3/3PP3/8/PPP2PPP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq -
I get 95% in a complete 11 ply search in the same position.
Which takes 288.88 seconds.
Michel
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.