Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: hash numbers requested: authors please read

Author: James Swafford

Date: 20:32:03 09/17/02

Go up one level in this thread


On September 17, 2002 at 23:03:13, Robert Hyatt wrote:


>>          fail highs: 10866 (3%); fl: 9929 (3%); ex: 671 (0%)
>              hashing-> 29%(raw) 24%(depth)  99%(sat)  99%(pawn)
>              hashing-> 0%(exact)  16%(lower)  1%(upper)
>>
>>          fh: 1531962 (49%); fl: 432594 (13%); ex: 2836 (0%)
>              hashing-> 64%(raw) 59%(depth)  99%(sat)  99%(pawn)
>              hashing-> 0%(exact)  55%(lower)  2%(upper)
>>
>>          fh: 3443 (1%); fl: 2926 (1%); ex: 151 (0%)
>              hashing-> 24%(raw) 18%(depth)  98%(sat)  98%(pawn)
>              hashing-> 0%(exact)  16%(lower)  0%(upper)
>

Thanks Bob.  I've cut and pasted your data to follow mine for
each position.  I don't count the number of probes I do.. maybe
I should.  Anyway, on positions 1 and 3 I noticed your fail high%
is significantly higher than mine.  On position 2, my fail low%
is significantly higher than yours.  Position 2 is more "tactical".

How do you interpret that?  Is it likely that I have a bug, or
is this a consequence of poor (or different) move ordering?
My move ordering is horrible right now... but I'm not sure how that
affects my hash table usage.

BTW - I'm using a combination of depth preferred and always
replace.  The "tables" are the same size (really one big table
so I can do consecutive reads).


--
James



This page took 0.02 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.