Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: History Heuristic

Author: Peter Fendrich

Date: 03:53:44 03/17/04

Go up one level in this thread


On March 17, 2004 at 06:08:02, Sune Fischer wrote:

>On March 17, 2004 at 05:50:57, Mikael Bäckman wrote:
>
>>On March 17, 2004 at 05:26:30, Sune Fischer wrote:
>>
>>>On March 17, 2004 at 05:17:43, Mikael Bäckman wrote:
>>>
>>>>>Just a single test position to depth 15:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Testing on a single position is wrong.
>>>>If you take 20 positions and repeat the test, are the results still the same?
>>>>
>>>>/Mikael
>>>
>>>True.
>>>
>>>I have tested on other positions back when I started using this, but as you can
>>>see it takes a long time for each position so I just tried a single one this
>>>time.
>>>If the search is deep enough I always get the same pattern with the local
>>>overtaking the global.
>>>
>>>It would be interesting to see if Crafty and other engines exibit the same
>>>behavior, I would expect so but one never knows :)
>>>
>>>-S.
>>
>>I can run some tests when I get home, but I would need to know exactly how you
>>'localize' the HH. Divide with X every N nodes?
>
>Yes, pretty much.
>I scale it down by a factor 8 when the entries hit a certain limit, ie.
>
>if (hist[index]>X)
>  for (i...)
>     hist[i]=hist_seed[i]+(hist[i]>>3);


This doesn't make sense to me. Maybe you meant to have the for-stmt before the
if-stmt? That's what I have tested a few times but without the hist_seed thing.
Is it a random seed and does that really help?
I have similar results as you but with much less differences than you between
the different frequencies. Without any seed though.


/Peter


>
>>My history tables in chepla look like history[stm][piece][to], it will be
>>interesting to compare the numbers.
>
>That should be possible, as I use the exact same type of table.
>
>>One thing to check before running these tests.
>>I had a bug a while ago where my History tables would overtake the good captures
>>in movesorting: I add a base value of B for all good and equal captures. In some
>>deep searches (mostly endgames searches) history values would become greater
>>than B...
>
>History scores can get quite big and tough to beat :)
>
>One solution could be to search all the captures before you even assign history
>scores to the non-captures.
>
>-S.
>>/Mikael



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.