Author: Nathan Thom
Date: 15:23:31 04/16/03
Go up one level in this thread
On April 16, 2003 at 07:48:04, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >On April 15, 2003 at 19:00:07, Nathan Thom wrote: > >>On April 15, 2003 at 10:23:01, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >> >>>On April 15, 2003 at 08:03:36, Nathan Thom wrote: >>> >>>>My engine is giving me headaches :) Its performing pretty badly against test >>>>positions (even thought it can beat me!). I have concerns over the following >>>>statistics: >>>> >>>>1. The PVS search success ratio seems extremely high, of 180k attempts, only 9 >>>>fail (ie value > alpha && value < beta). >>>> >>>>2. When writing to the hash table, of 50k writes 40k are lower bounds, 10k upper >>>>bounds, 20 exact. >>>> >>>>Does anyone else have any statistics for what I should be getting, or any >>>>suggestions where to look for errors??? >>> >>>what position and depth did you test? >> >>For these particular numbers i used >> >>[D]4r1r1/bB4p1/8/2p1kPKn/n7/3R4/3P4/2B5 w >> >>and searched to a depth of around 6 or 7 i think. > >Took 0.13 seconds to start all 1 other processes out of 2 >00:00 1469 1k 0 0 1469 (2) 2 (0,0) 0.000 Rd3-d5 Ke5-e4 Rd5-d7 Ke4-e5 Rd7-d5 > >00:00 154880 155k 0 0 7744 (2) 3 (0,6) 0.000 Rd3-d5 Ke5-e4 Rd5-d7 Ke4-e5 Rd7-d5 > >00:00 207070 207k 0 0 20707 (2) 4 (0,15) 0.000 Rd3-d5 Ke5-e4 Rd5-d7 Ke4-e5 Rd7-d >5 >00:00 244484 244k 0 0 46452 (2) 5 (0,32) 0.000 Rd3-d5 Ke5-e4 Rd5-d7 Ke4-e5 Rd7-d >5 >00:00 235494 235k 0 0 89488 (2) 6 (1,64) 0.000 Rd3-d5 Ke5-e4 Rd5-d7 Ke4-e5 Rd7-d >5 >00:02 164338 164k 0 0 433853 (2) 7 (14,143) 5.941 Rd3-d5 Ke5-e4 Rd5-d7 Ke4-e5 Bc >1-a3 c5-c4 Ba3-d6 Ke5-d4 Bd6-f8 Kd4-e5 Rd7-d5 Ke5-e4 Rd5-d8 Ke4-e5 Rd8xe8 Ke5-d4 > Re8-d8 Kd4-e5 Rd8-d5 Ke5-e4 Rd5-d7 Ke4-e5 Bf8-d6 Ke5-d4 Bd6-b8 Kd4-c5 Bb8xa7 Kc >5-b4 Kg5xh5 >00:03 202307 202k 0 0 793047 (2) 8 (31,333) MATE16 Rd3-d5 Ke5-e4 Rd5-d7 Ke4-e5 B >c1-a3 c5-c4 Ba3-d6 Ke5-d4 Bd6-f8 Kd4-e5 Rd7-d5 Ke5-e4 Rd5-d8 Ke4-e5 Rd8xe8 Ke5-d >4 Re8-d8 Kd4-e5 Rd8-d5 Ke5-e4 Rd5-d7 Ke4-e5 Bf8-d6 Ke5-d4 Bd6-b4 Kd4-e5 d2-d4 c4 >xd3 Rd7-e7 Ke5-d4 Re7-e4 > >Hmm not sure such positions are good ones to test with. In general mate in x >positions are very bad to generate statistics as they are unreliable and >depending upon different move ordering and different branching factors and more >upon extensions and quiescencesearch. > >So testing anything at it except whether your extensions work well should be >avoided. thanks. im not using any extensions yet, which i thought might be one reason for its poor performance.
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.