Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 07:58:23 11/12/02
Go up one level in this thread
On November 12, 2002 at 10:26:46, Uri Blass wrote: >On November 12, 2002 at 09:44:58, Russell Reagan wrote: > >>On November 12, 2002 at 03:31:58, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>No >>> >>>If I see better score in one of the thread with low priority >>>or if I see fail low in the main thread then I can increase the priority >>>of one of the threads that was given originally low priority. >> >>You are missing the point, or you do not understand how thread priority works. >>The thread with a higher priority ALWAYS runs first. The lower priority threads >>will almost NEVER get any processing time. Add in the fact that there are 30 or >>40 of those threads competing for the "almost never" cpu time they will get, and >>not a single one of those threads will produce one bit of useful information. >>Your higher priority thread will be searching normally, maybe 10-12 ply deep, >>and your other threads will be at 1 or 2 ply and will provide no useful >>information for you to determine if another move is better. > >I think that they may get 5 plies and not 2 plies and >I also think that 2 plies can provide useful information. That just won't work. Play thru some games and notice how many places where you find that a move looks great (or horrible) at depth=2, 3 or 4, but by the time you get to 10, 11, 12 or beyond, the score has changed drastically... >For example you may see that all the moves except 2 are losing so you can >increase the priority of the interesting thread(not the move you expect) to 10% >and you have 90% for the move that you expect and 10% for an interesting move to >check. > >if you search 10-12 plies with 90% of the time then you may search 8-10 plies >with 10% of the time and you can increase the 10% to more than it later based on >information that you get in the search. > >Uri
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.