Author: Omid David Tabibi
Date: 09:21:34 11/22/02
Go up one level in this thread
On November 22, 2002 at 12:08:12, Sune Fischer wrote: >On November 22, 2002 at 07:00:01, Omid David Tabibi wrote: > >I think you are right, search times are no good, for many reasons. > >However, why don't you use nodes to solution, rather than nodes to depth? > >The priority is to solve the position as fast as possible, nodes to solution is >a direct measure of that. > >If you measure nodes to ply 10, what does that say? >It doesn't say a lot, I can get to ply 10 in 124 nodes, but the program won't be >any good. So you need confirmation that you didn't wreck it by running the test >suite. > >Instead of having the test suite be an indirect verification test, why not use >it directly? > Nodes to solution is a great idea. But there are some positions that need a tremendous amount of time to be solved. That idea will be practical only if we have a pool of positions that can be solved within a reasonable time. >-S. > >PS. >Nice article and keep 'em comming, Thanks. More under way ;-) >I'll try it out sometime :)
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.