Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Crafty Static Evals 2 questions

Author: Wayne Lowrance

Date: 14:08:05 02/25/04

Go up one level in this thread


On February 25, 2004 at 10:58:36, Robert Hyatt wrote:

>On February 25, 2004 at 09:13:43, martin fierz wrote:
>
>>On February 25, 2004 at 07:02:11, Dieter Buerssner wrote:
>>
>>>On February 25, 2004 at 05:56:16, martin fierz wrote:
>>>
>>>>it won't pop *my* eyes. i once reduced hash key sizes in my checkers program
>>>>beyond all sensible settings, because there was a discussion here about whether
>>>>you really need 64-bit keys. in my checkers program, i have 64 bit keys, but
>>>>effectively it's only using about 52 bits. i have about a 20 bit part which is
>>>>used for the hashindex with %, and of the remaining 44 bits i store only 32 as a
>>>>check. i reduced those 32 down to about 8 (!!) bits and in 100 test positions
>>>>only saw one different move played IIRC. ridiculous, i must have lots of
>>>>collisions there. unfortunately, i didn't count the collision number, or write
>>>>down the results - but i know what you're talking about!
>>>
>>>Almost the same experiment with my chess engine (inluding many details, like the
>>>effective number of bits used, and going down to 8 bits only):
>>>http://chessprogramming.org/cccsearch/ccc.php?art_id=190318
>>>
>>>Regards,
>>>Dieter
>>
>>hi dieter,
>>
>>i had forgotten about your post on this, but now i remember it. very similar to
>>my observations, and if only we had written our observations up a bit more
>>seriously we could have written the paper that bob is publishing now ;-)
>>
>>cheers
>>  martin
>
>
>Hey, I'm easy to get along with here.  :)
>
>I have already asked one other person to do some similar testing.  I'd be happy
>to tell you both what I have done, and have you run similar tests, and join me
>as authors on this paper.
>
>I am doing the test slightly different, as rather than a specific number of
>signature bits, I am forcing a particular error rate (ie one error every N
>nodes) with the idea being that I should be able to choose N in 1 error every N
>nodes such that the score never changes, or the score changes or not the best
>move, or the best move changes but it is not a bad change, or the best move
>changes and it probably changes the game outcome.
>
>If either/both are interested, email me and I can send you a draft, which
>explains how I am testing, and includes the test positions I am using.  I have
>some endgame positions (ie like fine 70), some sharp tactical positions like the
>Ba3 Botvinnik-Capablanca move, and some plain middlegame positions from games
>Crafty played on ICC.
>
>Let me know if you are interested...

Very impressive ! My respect for Bob is very high, always has been. My only
problem with Bob is his bickering> But Bob aint gonna take nothin from any one.
:)
Wayne



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.