Author: Gian-Carlo Pascutto
Date: 10:10:49 06/24/02
Go up one level in this thread
On June 24, 2002 at 11:54:55, Steve Coladonato wrote: >The nominal depth may be "artificial" because of the extensions and pruning but >would it not be a gauge of how well the alogrithms/heuristics are doing in the >evaluation? I understand from the other replies that Junior counts "plies" >differently, but do not the other programs use the term ply equivalently (I >don't know if that's a word or not)? No. The amount of work that is done for each ply is different for each program. Plies are not comparable. >I do know that if you chase an evaluation >down the variation the score can become much different near the end of the >variation. So would not a deeper ply depth also be an indicator for the >correctness of at least the initial part of the variation? You cannot compare plies, hence your last question makes no sense. -- GCP
This page took 0.01 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.