Author: Uri Blass
Date: 13:05:22 09/19/02
Go up one level in this thread
On September 19, 2002 at 15:39:46, David Hanley wrote: >On September 19, 2002 at 14:17:16, Uri Blass wrote: > > >>Is it shorter than tscp? >> > >I had to download TSCP and look it over. It's pretty compact. > >It's actually a *little* shorter. It has fewer comments but longer >function/variable names and more of 'em. It's written in lisp vs C, and my >source is all in one file, so it's hard to compare exactly. TSCP has a more >eval going on, but i have hash tables, separate pawn hash, history, nullmove, >killers, lazy evaluation, static exchange eval in the move orderer and quiesce, >etc, OTOH, i'm only getting about 10K NPS, but there's a lot i can do to speed >it up--i do considerable allocation during search--but i want to get it on FICS >and tweak the eval and search before i worry about that. > >>Does it play better than tscp? > >I downloaded tscp, and i think they play about the same.. But i could be way >off. TSCP is a good deal faster, but seems to cover a lot more nodes to get to >the same depth. I'd have to play them head to head to get a good idea of the >relative strength... > >dave My guess based on the descreption that you gave is that tscp is better at short time control when your program is better at long time control. I think that tscp only make the illusion of knowledge but it does not know the important things so it is possible to have a simpler evaluation that has the same quality. I think that the fact that your program has better branching factor should be decisive at long time control but the fact that tscp searches more nodes per seocnd should be decisive at blitz. Uri
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.