Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 13:57:23 05/11/02
Go up one level in this thread
On May 11, 2002 at 07:15:39, Chessfun wrote:
>On May 10, 2002 at 22:59:38, Christophe Theron wrote:
>
>>On May 10, 2002 at 13:52:52, Terry McCracken wrote:
>>
>>>On May 10, 2002 at 11:45:58, James T. Walker wrote:
>>>
>>>>Here are the latest games of Hiarcs 8 vs various opponents. This time Chess
>>>>Tiger 14.0 had the honor of drubbing Hiarcs 8. The final score was 8-4 favor of
>>>>Chess Tiger 14.0. All games on 2 Athlon 1.4G machines using auto232. Chess
>>>>Tiger 14.0 ran in the Chesspartner GUI.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>I think part of Hiarcs 8's problem, if not it's main problem, is that it's a
>>>_slow_ searcher and should be tested at slower time controls, such as 40/2hrs.
>>>At slower T/C's it should slowly catch up on search as the tree widens at every
>>>interation, which will start to slow up the faster searchers like Fritz or
>>>Junior, as Hiarcs 8 like the "proverbial tortoise" over time will reach
>>>sufficient depths to compensate for it's weakness, IMO.
>>
>>
>>
>>You are actually saying that Hiarcs8's branching factor is superior the
>>branching factor of other top programs.
>>
>>It would be great if you could demonstrate it.
>>
>>So far the only thing I see is the classical excuse: "let it play at longer time
>>controls".
>
>
>Hmmm, I'm not sure Thorsten would call it an excuse.
>
>
>>When I see such an excuse, I can't help thinking that it doesn't smell good for
>>the program in question.
>
>
>Your beginning to sound like Robert :-).
>
>
>>I hope Hiarcs 8 does not need this excuse.
>>
>>And about your "slow searcher" theory: previous versions of Hiarcs were
>>excellent at very fast time controls. Maybe you should find another theory.
>
>
>Exactly correct.
>From my own lightning list.
>(11) Hiarcs 7.32 : 1040 (+402,=285,-353), 52.4 %
>
>Crafty 18.01 : 40 (+ 25,= 4,- 11), 67.5 %
>Nimzo 8 : 40 (+ 18,= 10,- 12), 57.5 %
>Deep Fritz : 40 (+ 17,= 10,- 13), 55.0 %
>Nimzo 7.32 : 40 (+ 18,= 8,- 14), 55.0 %
>Fritz 5.32 : 40 (+ 16,= 15,- 9), 58.8 %
>Junior 7 : 40 (+ 15,= 11,- 14), 51.2 %
>Fritz6a : 40 (+ 13,= 17,- 10), 53.8 %
>Junior 6a : 40 (+ 15,= 14,- 11), 55.0 %
>Fritz 6 : 40 (+ 12,= 15,- 13), 48.8 %
>Junior 5.0 : 40 (+ 15,= 5,- 20), 43.8 %
>Fritz6b : 40 (+ 10,= 13,- 17), 41.2 %
>Junior 6 : 40 (+ 17,= 12,- 11), 57.5 %
>Gambit Tiger 2.0 : 40 (+ 13,= 19,- 8), 56.2 %
>Chess Tiger 14.0 : 40 (+ 15,= 9,- 16), 48.8 %
>Crafty 18.10 : 40 (+ 17,= 12,- 11), 57.5 %
>Yace 0.99.50 : 40 (+ 19,= 10,- 11), 60.0 %
>Deep Junior 7 : 40 (+ 12,= 9,- 19), 41.2 %
>Goliath Light 1.5 : 40 (+ 20,= 14,- 6), 67.5 %
>Shredder 5.32 : 40 (+ 13,= 7,- 20), 41.2 %
>Fritz 6 Old : 40 (+ 19,= 6,- 15), 55.0 %
>Shredder 5.0 : 40 (+ 20,= 8,- 12), 60.0 %
>Deep Shredder : 40 (+ 17,= 10,- 13), 55.0 %
>Gandalf_432h : 40 (+ 18,= 13,- 9), 61.3 %
>Fritz 7 (No MMX) : 40 (+ 6,= 12,- 22), 30.0 %
>Fritz 7 : 40 (+ 15,= 8,- 17), 47.5 %
>Fritz 7a : 40 (+ 7,= 14,- 19), 35.0 %
>
>I guess we'll soon see how Hiarcs 8 performs at lightning.
>
>Sarah.
I bet it will be even better.
Apparently Mark has wonderful search algorithms near the horizon. But I can't
say for sure, I have not tried Hiarcs yet.
Christophe
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.