Author: Gian-Carlo Pascutto
Date: 04:26:02 11/22/02
Go up one level in this thread
On November 22, 2002 at 07:11:20, Uri Blass wrote: >It may be interesting if you can post results of deep sjeng at 300 seconds per >position and not only at 10 seconds per position. > >The difference for movei is smaller at 300 seconds per position and I did not >use research(I suspect that with research reults may be better). I expect it to do better at longer times too of course, for the reason pointed out in this thread than it becomes more comparable to R=3. R=3 is superior in Deep Sjeng compared to verified R=3, so as verified gets closer to R=3, it will do better, but I don't expect it to do "better than R=3". I have different testing priorities right now because in any case it looks vastly inferior to what I am doing now (not R=3 and not R=2/3). It would have been nice if it was better than R=2/3, but so far, noone reported success... >My hardware is AMD1000Mhz so you can use smaller time to get eqvivalent results >but clearly more than 10 seconds. > >You can also see that there is a problem in comparing correct results because >some problems that are solved by movei with R=3 are not solved for the right >reason and movei may change it's mind later(I showed one case when it did it). Not much of an issue considering that there are 183 positions total and I average the solution time over at least 115 of then. BTW. Uri, since you use ECM-GCP as well, and you've posted corrections, I assume you have an improved version. Would you care to email it to me? -- GCP
This page took 0.1 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 07 Jul 11 08:48:38 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.