Author: Uri Blass
Date: 05:14:09 05/06/04
Go up one level in this thread
On May 05, 2004 at 14:35:10, Vasik Rajlich wrote: >On May 05, 2004 at 07:12:22, Tord Romstad wrote: > >>On May 05, 2004 at 05:11:53, Vasik Rajlich wrote: >> >>>On May 04, 2004 at 12:40:09, Tord Romstad wrote: >>> >>>>But in fact, I prefer not to use TBs even at the PC, for aesthetical >>>>reasons. Using more than 1 MB of disk space just in order to play KQKR >>>>endgames perfectly is really ugly. >>> >>>Of course same could be said for alpha-beta, and searching 20 million positions >>>just to move a rook to an open file. (Ok, 5 million for Gothmog.) >> >>Aesthetics is always a subjective thing, of course. My personal preference >>is to always let the engine figure out as much as possible by itself, based >>on general knowledge without too many complicated special cases. A huge >>lookup table containing the exact number of plies to mate for all KQKR >>positions is about as far from general knowledge as you can possibly come. >> >>Tord > >Well, for KQKR I'm sure you can in a few hours come up with something effective, >even at low search depths. However, for things like KRPKR and KPPKP, tablebases >are a really nice solution that you won't easily replace. > >Note also that 20 elo points is nothing to scoff at. If you speed up your engine >by 40%, that's about what you'll gain, and we've seen how far some people will >go to get this. You're probably at the point with Gothmog where you'll happily >work for a month to get a ten-point increase. No Based on reading an old post of dann Corbit Tord probably can get more than 10 elo improvement only by a better compiler, but it seems that he does not care about small linear improvement and go for the big exponential stuff. Uri
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.