Author: Steve Coladonato
Date: 11:10:17 06/26/02
Go up one level in this thread
On June 26, 2002 at 12:51:05, Daniel Clausen wrote: >On June 26, 2002 at 07:26:10, Steve Coladonato wrote: > >[snip] > >> And say I also want to have the analysis go to 11 ply. > >And that's exactly the point where you go wrong. It makes not much sense to want >to have the analysis go to 11 ply. Maybe what you want is to have an analysis >where the engine sees all tactical combinations within 6 moves or something like >that. But a 11 ply search doesn't necessarily do that - it depends on the >engine. It also depends on the position, and what not. > >If you want to analyze a game and you don't want to spend more than X seconds >per position, do exactly that - limit the time the engine should take for a >position accordingly. > >Sargon There is a threshold where the engines take a major factor to get to the next depth in their analysis. If I know that an engine can do an 11 ply search in N minutes then I can set my time accordingly. However, if I just limit the time to say 3 minutes, the engine may only be capable of getting to ply 8 in that time. So I've wasted an analysis because the depth is too shallow. I'm looking for the threshold where getting to the next depth is just not worth the exorbitant amount of time to get there.
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.