Author: Bob Durrett
Date: 08:36:58 01/14/04
Go up one level in this thread
On January 14, 2004 at 11:32:13, Mikael Bäckman wrote: >On January 14, 2004 at 07:08:50, Tord Romstad wrote: > >>The day before I released Gothmog 0.4.5, I played a blitz match (4 minutes/game, >>with 1 second increment) between my engine and Phalanx XXII on my PowerBook >>G4 550 MHz. Gothmog narrowly won the match; the final score was 52.5-47.5. >> >>Yesterday, I started a new match between the same two engines. The only >>difference was that this match was played on a PIV 2.4 GHz, and that learning >>was disabled for Phalanx in the second match (my own engine doesn't learn). >>The result: 65-35 for Gothmog. >> >>Is this just a statistical fluctuation, or is learning really that effective? >>Or perhaps Phalanx (a very old engine) simply doesn't play well on fast >>hardware? >> >>Tord > > >Did you check if there there were many similar or same openings in the games? > >If the books were narrow (or instructed to always play the best move etc), and >similar openings were played, the engine with learning might benefit a lot from >these conditions. > >/Mikael It would be possible, in theory, to examine relevant transpositions so that any line being deleted would also result in changes to the the relevant transpositions. All this eats up processor time, so one would not expect too much of this if it impacted overall performance in the game being played. Or, so it seems to me. Bob D.
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.