Author: Michel Langeveld
Date: 21:04:37 06/04/03
Go up one level in this thread
On June 04, 2003 at 19:50:06, Anthony Cozzie wrote:
>On June 04, 2003 at 16:30:45, Michel Langeveld wrote:
>
>>>>//Nullmover with only material
>>>>Nodes per sec.: 319485
>>>
>>>>//Nullmover with everything switched on:
>>>>Nodes per sec.: 301770
>>>
>>>This looks strange. I think you should expect a much bigger difference in
>>>nodes/s.
>>>
>>>Regards,
>>>Dieter
>>
>>Yes I was also thinking it was odd...
>>I expected also a bigger difference ... Am not sure why this is ...
>>
>>my eval starts with:
>>
>>int generatePositionScore(int alpha, int beta)
>>{
>> evalCounter++;
>>
>> if (isDraw()) return 0;
>> }
>>
>> scoreType score = p.materialWhite - p.materialBlack;
>>
>> //lazy eval
>> if (score - 150 > beta) return score;
>> if (score + 150 < alpha) return score;
>>
>> ...
>>}
>>
>>It can be that the first part which I call lazy eval catches a lot of positions
>>.... or there is a much bigger hotspot as the evaluation currently.
>>I will run a profile to see if I can find more out ....
>
>Kingsafety in many programs can be over 1.5 pawns.
>
>Almost any reasonable evaluation of passed pawns will require corrections of
>over 1.5 pawns.
Yes, you are right. Kingsafety and passed pawns is still on the todolist of
Nullmover. It simply doesn't have any kind of such code. I have to take care to
rise these scores after implementing it.
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.