Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: The law of diminishing returns

Author: José Carlos

Date: 16:16:31 07/12/02

Go up one level in this thread


On July 12, 2002 at 14:56:11, Ed Schröder wrote:

>Hi CCC,
>
>In Rebel I maintain a statistic file, on every iteration a counter is
>incremented with 1 (see column 2) representing the iteration depths Rebel has
>searched. When a new best move is found a second counter is incremented with 1
>(see column 3) representing how many times a new best move has been found on the
>given iteration depth, between brackets the percentage is calculated.
>
>As you can see the very first plies Rebel often changes to new best moves,
>however when the depth increases and increases the chance Rebel will change its
>mind drops and drops. From 16 plies on the chance a new better move is found is
>below 2%.
>
>I wonder what this all means, it is still said (and believed by many) that a
>doubling in computer speed gives 30-50-70 elo. That could be very well true for
>lower depths but the below statistic seem to imply something totally different,
>a sharp diminishing return on deeper depths.
>
>Interesting also is colum 4 (Big Score Changes), whenever a big score difference
>is measured (0.50 up or down) the percentage is calculated. This item seems to
>be less sensitive than the change in best move. However the maintained "Big
>Score Changes" statistic is not fully reliable as it also counts situations like
>being a rook or queen up (or down) in positions and naturally you get (too) many
>big score fluctuations. I have changed that and have limit the system to scores
>in the range of -2.50 / +2.50 but for the moment have too few games played to
>show the new statistic.
>
>Anyway the number of positions calculated seem to be more than sufficient (over
>100,000) to be reliable. The origin came from extensive testing the latest Rebel
>via self-play at various time controls.

  Hi Ed, if I get this right, the second column (moves searched) is the number
of positions in which the program has reached the depth given by column 1. If it
was really "moves", there would be about 3x in depth 2 than in depth 1.
  Then the idea is that many more changes happen in low depths because the
program is there many more times, so I (ignoring "Big Changes") calculated a
couple of other numbers:
  The ratio moves changes / moves searched and the relative % of changes from
ply to ply:

                 SEARCH OVERVIEW
                 ===============

  (A)     (B)            (C)           (D)             (E)
Depth    Moves          Moves     Moves Changed /   rel % of changes from
       Searched        Changed    Moves Searched    ply n-1 to n

 1     113768         0 =  0.0%        0
 2     113768     44241 = 38.9%    0.388870333
 3     113768     34262 = 30.1%    0.30115674        77.44%
 4     113194     32619 = 28.8%    0.288168984       95.69%
 5     113191     30697 = 27.1%    0.271196473       94.11%
 6     108633     28516 = 26.2%    0.262498504       96.79%
 7     108180     25437 = 23.5%    0.235135885       89.58%
 8     102782     22417 = 21.8%    0.218102391       92.76%
 9      82629     15400 = 18.6%    0.186375244       85.45%
10      59032      9144 = 15.5%    0.154899038       83.11%
11      39340      5183 = 13.2%    0.131748856       85.05%
12      23496      2350 = 10.0%    0.100017024       75.91%
13      12692       957 =  7.5%    0.075401828       75.39%
14       6911       396 =  5.7%    0.057299957       75.99%
15       4032       193 =  4.8%    0.047867063       83.54%
16       2471        72 =  2.9%    0.029138001       60.87%
17       1608        26 =  1.6%    0.016169154       55.49%
18       1138        17 =  1.5%    0.014938489       92.39%
19        921         6 =  0.7%    0.006514658       43.61%
20        795         7 =  0.9%    0.008805031      135.16%
21        711         1 =  0.1%    0.00140647        15.97%
22        636         2 =  0.3%    0.003144654      223.58%
23        574         5 =  0.9%    0.008710801      277.00%
24        507         1 =  0.2%    0.001972387       22.64%
25        451         3 =  0.7%    0.006651885      337.25%
26        394         1 =  0.3%    0.002538071       38.16%
27        343         2 =  0.6%    0.005830904      229.74%
28        296         2 =  0.7%    0.006756757      115.88%
29        269         0 =  0.0%    0                  0.00%

  Column (D) means the probability at a certain position at a certain depth to
get a change, according to your data, for a random position (I assume you chose
random positions, because this data comes from real games). This is interesting
because it might be possible to try to use time having this into account to
decide whether to continue searching or to save time for later moves.
  Column (E) means what's the relative probability from ply n-1 to n. For
example, the probability of changing the move at depth 10 is 83.11% of the one
at depth 9, this is, 16.89% less. It is also a "big number" (for human eyes)
that help following how probability decreases. Anything under 100 is decreasing.
It's interesting to see the fluctuations at big depths, most probably because of
the small sample.
  Thanks anyway for the interesting experiment.

  José C.



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.