Author: JW de Kort
Date: 04:30:02 12/17/02
Go up one level in this thread
On December 17, 2002 at 07:07:46, Uri Blass wrote: >On December 17, 2002 at 06:31:50, JW de Kort wrote: > >>On December 17, 2002 at 05:45:28, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On December 17, 2002 at 05:34:31, JW de Kort wrote: >>> >>>>On December 17, 2002 at 05:09:31, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: >>>> >>>>>On December 17, 2002 at 04:15:26, JW de Kort wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>>Currently i'am using a piecelist to keep track of the locations of the pieces in >>>>>>my 0x88 based program. Iám thinking about removing this list and replacing it by >>>>>>a bitboard to keep track of the piecelocations of white pieces and black pieces. >>>>>>I'am wondering of anybody else does this (i think some one will) and if this is >>>>>>a good improvement to spees up my engine which is terrably slow. I have good >>>>>>expierences with other bitboards in my program. I already use bitboard to do the >>>>>>pawn evaluations and i'am thinkin about gradually removing the 0x88 stuff to >>>>>>replace it with bitboards >>>>>> >>>>>>any help appreciated >>>>> >>>>>Have you used a profiler to check where the program is spending most of its >>>>>time? >>>>> >>>>>-- >>>>>GCP >>>> >>>>Indeed i did. Most of its time is pend in the evualation code but that is nomal. >>> >>>I do not think that this is normal >>>Amir ban said that only 20% of the time is spent on the evaluation code of >>>Junior. >>> >>>The question is also what you define as evaluation code. >>> >>>I have arrays that are used in the evaluation and I update them when I make >>>moves. >>> >>>Should I include the time that I update the array as part of my evaluation code. >>>even if the arrays are used not only for evaluation but also for extension >>>rules? >>> >>>Uri >> >>Dear Uri, >> >>I do not dream of comparing my program to Junior. I managed to cut the time >>spend evaluating by using lazy evaluation. No my program does not do a full >>evaluation in a large number of positions. >> >>If i would do what you did i would not include the time spend updating as part >>of the time spend evaluating. >> >>Regards >> >>JWK > >By that definition today I use less than 5% of the time in evaluation. >My evaluation includes only the following factors: >1)piece square table >2)mobility when I use only the number of moves that both sides have(this >evaluation can be improved but it clearly help my program and I believe that it >is more important than knowledge about pawn structure). >3)double pawns(I use special arrays that are updated during making move for it) >4)some secret factor that is easy to evaluate for my program. I have no exact percentage but i estimate about 50% is spend evaluating. I use 1) also, 2) i do not because i am afraid it is to costly to calculate but i will try it soon, 3( i also have plus a number of other pawn factors, en 4) i also have some extra features like devolpment etc. > >I believe that secret 4 is something that no program or almost no program knows >to evaluate and I do not want to lose my relative advantage. You are right about this. > >I have also secrets in my search algorithm but at the same time I also do stupid >things that no top program does(for example I do not use hash table efficientely >and I do not have some productive extensions that crafty have) so my search is >still clearly inferior to the search of the top programs. > The same goes for my program. My hashtable is not used efficiently but iam happy that is does work at all. >My program can often beat crafty in tactics but I am not going to say that >it is better than crafty in tactics inspite of the fact that it may be better >than crafty in the GCP test suite(comparison in the gcp test suite is unfair >because movei trains on this suite and I decided about changes in my search >algorithm in some cases from learning the reason that movei failed). I have not jet matches up my program agains Crafty. > >My target is of course to do it playing better but if I have some trick to make >it clearly faster in some positions without making it slower in other positions >then this trick is probably productive trick also in games(I also test in games >to verify that I did not do something bad in my search rules). Can you be more specific? > >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.