Author: Anthony Cozzie
Date: 10:52:02 04/02/04
Go up one level in this thread
On April 02, 2004 at 02:13:53, Johan de Koning wrote: >On April 01, 2004 at 22:30:27, Eugene Nalimov wrote: > >>I see. So in FEG your have krpkr wtm, krpkr btm, krkrp wtm, and krkrp btm. Than >>yes, you can figure value without the search, at a cost of (probable) extra TB >>probe. Extra probe is unavoidable when the score is a draw. > >As Uri pointed out, one can easily avoid these extra probes inside >an alpha-beta search. > >But as Theron pointed out some years ago, one should avoid *any* >probe inside a search. > >>So your are paying that price, and slower access due to 4x larger block size, to >>achieve ~30% smaller TBs. Reasonable tradeoff, but I would not call it "better" >>:-) > >Decompression time is tiny compared to random disk access, and it is >getting tinyer all the time. Hence when we're talking about 20% smaller >(rather then 30% !) it's not a trade-off but simply a small advantage. > >When it comes to "better", there is the simple fact that FEG generates >the data [BLEEP]ingly fast. On any machine. Without the need to update >whenever some Pawn is added to whatever side. > >Please accept that fact and don't play stupid (or should I say don't >play MicroSoft?). Though my social intelligence is close to retarded, >I can't help sensing friction eversince we met (Maastricht 2002). >I'm trying to ignore it, and letting it be your problem. But as you >can see, sometimes I fail to ignore it. Let's just say Nalimov TBs >are cool and FEG is cool, OK? > >>BTW you can achieve better compression in .emd files by replacing all "broken" >>scores by the most common non-broken score in the TB. I always was curious how >>much it will save, but never made the experiment... > >Do the experiment and be surpised. Surprised by the fact it doesn't >save much. Surprised by the fact that, given a suitable symbol size, >statistical compression works much better than intuition. Well, we >knew that already. But still it is scary. :-) > >... Johan For those of us that don't want to spend 1 year writing good interior node recognizers, the Nalimov TBs & free code are great :) anthony
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.