Author: Uri Blass
Date: 02:10:19 05/28/02
Go up one level in this thread
On May 27, 2002 at 21:19:58, stuart taylor wrote: >What exactly are you doing here? >It looks like an even better chance to see if Hiarcs proves itself, than >testings until now. But what exactly? >S.Taylor Junior proves itself as the smarter engine in the endgame when Hiarcs evaluate itself as almost +3 in a drawn tablebases position. Maybe we can find that Junior is better at longer time control based on this test. The probability to get evidence for it is at least the same as the probability to get evidence that Hiarcs is better at long time control. I do not see something special in Hiarcs that should make it relatively better at long time control and I do not know about an engine with some special knowledge for long time control. The programmer of Hiarcs also did not claim that Hiarcs is better at long time control so I see no reason to suspect that it is the case. Uri
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.