Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Question for you Endgame Enthusiasts

Author: John Merlino

Date: 10:52:16 04/09/04

Go up one level in this thread


On April 09, 2004 at 13:43:10, Dann Corbit wrote:

>On April 09, 2004 at 13:38:30, John Merlino wrote:
>
>>On April 09, 2004 at 13:33:36, Dann Corbit wrote:
>>
>>>On April 09, 2004 at 12:56:58, John Merlino wrote:
>>>
>>>>On April 09, 2004 at 02:24:36, Dann Corbit wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On April 09, 2004 at 00:35:43, Les Fernandez wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Is anyone aware of any study that has been done regarding the "time" thats
>>>>>>needed to generate endgame table bases?  Eugene would probably be the best one
>>>>>>to consult with since he appears to be the "authority on this subject" but I am
>>>>>>interested to hear from anyone.  Certainly it is important that the times are
>>>>>>all based on same hardware.  I am interested in studying the times it takes to
>>>>>>do each tablebase.  By each tablebase I mean each individual one.
>>>>>
>>>>>According to my understanding the ChessMaster FEG tablebase files are faster to
>>>>>generate and require less memory.
>>>>>
>>>>>I do not know if they can produce the statistics that you are interested in,
>>>>>however.
>>>>
>>>>Yes, they can. The FEG utility can perform a summary of all files generated on
>>>>your computer, and this includes the time it took to generate them.
>>>
>>>Is the format public?
>>
>>Nope.
>>
>>>Can other engines use the tables?
>>
>>Yes, if they had the format. :-)
>>But for now, Johan is keeping it to himself.
>
>Well then, I think we have the answer to the question:
>"WHy aren't people using the FEG format instead of Nalimov."
>... Because Nalimov format is the only sensible choice.  It makes the previous
>and tedious debate seem extremely silly to me now.

I knew that.... ;-)

Although I think the intended point of the debate was to determine which format
was "better", rather than which format should people be using. But, sadly, like
many CCC debates, I don't think anything remotely close to a consensus was
reached.

Isn't computer chess fun??!

jm



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.