Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 03:39:08 10/16/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 16, 2002 at 06:37:40, Thorsten Czub wrote: >On October 16, 2002 at 06:33:39, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: > >>It uses (I wouldn't say wastes) quite a bit of resources, >>but there is also a gain. I find that it is almost perfectly >>breaking even for me. I search less deep, but I am seeing >>some deep tactics and avoid getting into some dangerous >>situations. > >really ?! > >interesting. > >i gave up using SEX in rebel XP.... the problem of SE shows when search depths get big. GCP is basically testing at bullet levels and then you don't get search depths of 12+ ply soon. In DIEP the price of SE is basically getting too big at those depths. >but maybe my parameters where wrong. > > > >>Note that I do not do SEX the same way as the DB team >>did. I have tried it, and IMHO the results were worse >>than with my system. > >what do you mean with this. how is YOUR implementation different from theirs ? > > >>But I had little problems getting both to cooperate >>with nullmove or my parallel search. >> >>-- >>GCP
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.