Author: Steve Coladonato
Date: 16:05:22 06/24/02
Go up one level in this thread
On June 24, 2002 at 16:55:03, Terry Ripple wrote: >On June 24, 2002 at 11:48:46, Steve Coladonato wrote: > >>On June 24, 2002 at 11:05:29, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On June 24, 2002 at 07:35:53, Steve Coladonato wrote: >>> >>>>There is a post concerning a test position and some analysis by Junior and >>>>Shredder. I was curious if there has been a compilation of Depth vs. Time by >>>>Engine for some of these test positions where the hardware is the same (or >>>>really close to being the same). I'm not so curious as to whether a solution >>>>was found, just how long it takes to get to the depth. From the posts, it looks >>>>like it took Junior about 1 hour to reach Depth 21 while it took Shredder about >>>>1 hour to reach Depth 15. But I don't know if its apples vs. apples with the >>>>hardware. >>>> >>>>Thanks. >>>> >>>>Steve >--------------- >I believe if program A gets to 21 ply faster than program B it doesn't prove >that program A is the better program, because program A could have a very >selective search, but with this very selective search it could miss possibly >some good moves in a game and cause it to lose sometimes! > >Regards, > Terry Hi Terry, In that case, then would not the use of a selective search be considered an inferior algorithm to use. I don't know how each program evaluates its score for a given position and I do know that the evaluation can be tweaked via configuration files. So if the configuration files were ruled out such that each program scored the position the same, would not the faster (to a given ply depth) program win? Steve >>> >>> >>>Junior doesn't count "plies" the same as everybody else... >> >>Thanks Dr. Hyatt. There was a pretty big discrepancy there and I was wondering.
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.