Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: About history and aging it

Author: Mikael Bäckman

Date: 13:14:40 03/17/04



Hi,

I ran some tests with history and different methods of aging it, as discussed in
this thread:

http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?354812

I picked 15 test positions from this years Linares tournament. 10 positions are
from move 20 and 5 from move 40. I didn't study the positions much before
selecting them.

I used 90 seconds per position as I didn't know how deep I could search without
spending days on this... First I ran a test without historytables, to get a
depth to compare the other tests to. Most of the depths were completed in 20-60
seconds. Perhaps a bit shallow, but it gives an idea of the performance.

I use a side-piece-to historytable or history[side][piece][to] and I use at most
8 history moves at a node. After that I try the moves in the order they are
generated.


Test1 = No History
Test2 = History
Test3 = History - root aging
Test4 = History - age as soon as a history score gets larger than 10000.
Test5 = Same as 2 but with pawnmoves generated after all other moves. Included
this for fun, but it seems to work best. :)

Aging was done by dividing the values in the history tables with 8.
Nodecounts are in thousands.

Pos   D   Test1   Test2   Test3   Test4   Test5
--------------------------------------------------
01   12   27960   22044   21481   21923   21954
02   12   37488   31165   31706   25631   26492
03   10   34388   24471   24652   29455   24225
04   12   25099   21307   23497   20555   23460
05   13   30665   22026   22288   22156   21798
06   10   16141   12861   13447   13050   13576
07   14   44136   32362   31157   32776   32958
08   14   39848   38378   39681   38337   28706
09   11   31083   21410   24811   25470   25403
10   12   38152   29568   28020   29394   25669
11   13   29184   25017   27149   24854   23437
12   13   52650   27674   24784   26427   25901
13   14   58192   38986   41854   37978   41428
14   13   50823   45372   41400   41283   45473
15   13   63876   33226   32296   33651   32625
--------------------------------------------------
         579685  425867  428223  422940  413105
         (136%)  (100%)  (101%)   (99%)   (97%)


So, for me different history aging methods don't make much difference.

Any numbers out there for comparison?




Testpositions:

1r2kb1r/1q3p2/p2p1np1/P2Pp2p/RpB5/5P2/1PPQ2PP/2N1K2R w Kk h6 0 20 id
"Linares2004-1"; bm Nd3;
2br4/1pp2pk1/1n1b1pp1/r6p/p2PP2P/P1NN4/BP3PP1/2KR3R w - - 1 20 id
"Linares2004-2"; bm Rhe1;
r1b1rbk1/5pp1/pq1p1n1p/1p2n3/3NPB2/PB3N1P/1P3PP1/2RQR1K1 w - - 2 20 id
"Linares2004-3"; bm Be3;
1r2r1k1/pq3pp1/1ppb1n1p/3p4/3P4/P1N1PNP1/1PR1QP1P/3R2K1 w - - 1 20 id
"Linares2004-4"; bm Qd3;
1r3rk1/pp3ppp/8/2pn2q1/P1B5/1P1P4/2P3PP/R2Q1RK1 w - - 0 20 id "Linares2004-5";
bm Qf3;
4rrk1/pppb1ppp/3b2q1/n7/3P4/P1P1NB2/5PPP/R1BQR1K1 b - - 14 20 id
"Linares2004-6"; bm b5;
q4rk1/4b1pp/p2p4/1p2p1Pn/4P2P/1P2B3/1PPQ4/R3K2R b KQ - 0 20 id "Linares2004-7"";
bm Ng3;
2r2rk1/1b1qbppp/4p3/ppBpP3/3N1P2/4Q1P1/PP2P1BP/2R2RK1 b - - 0 20 id
"Linares2004-8"; bm Rxc5;
1rb2rk1/5pbp/p7/1p1Pp1q1/4B3/NQ4P1/PP3P1P/R2R2K1 b - - 2 20 id "Linares2004-9";
bm Bg4;
2rr2k1/pb2qpp1/1p2pn1p/8/Pb1PP3/3BQN1P/1B3PP1/R2R2K1 b - - 1 20
"Linares2004-10"; bm a5;
6k1/1b3pp1/1p1bp2p/p3N1qn/P2PP2P/5P2/1B3QP1/5BK1 b - - 0 40 id "Linares2004-11";
bm Qf4;
8/2k2p2/p5p1/2K1P3/P5bP/2BR4/1P6/7r w - - 1 40 id "Linares2004-12"; bm Ba5;
5b2/5p2/pn2r1k1/1p5p/1P1R1B2/P1r1NK2/2P5/7R w - - 1 40 id "Linares2004-13"; bm
Rg1;
5bk1/7p/p2p2p1/5qP1/2pN1p2/P6r/1PPQ4/1K2R3 b - - 1 40 id "Linares2004-14"; bm
Qd5;
4r3/5k2/p1p2r2/8/3Q2P1/P4P2/5K2/8 w - - 3 40 id "Linares2004-15"; bm Qc4;




This page took 0.01 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.