Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: The key to improving a program

Author: Tom Likens

Date: 19:05:36 05/25/04

Go up one level in this thread


On May 25, 2004 at 20:36:47, Uri Blass wrote:

>On May 25, 2004 at 19:36:04, Will Singleton wrote:
>
>>On May 25, 2004 at 17:44:55, Andrew Wagner wrote:
>>
>>>I do a lot of reading through CCC archives. I use the search engine from here,
>>>and also I'm in the process of reading through the old archives systematically
>>>using the offline reader (I'm in the fall of 2001 currently, I think). Anyway,
>>>sometimes I run across a nugget that makes me just stop and go "whoah". Here's a
>>>quote from one of Bob's posts, originally about hashing algorithms:
>>>
>>>>I think the key to improving a program, once it plays legally, is to develop
>>>>a methodology to carefully profile the code, find the hot spots, and then find
>>>>ways to speed up those hot spots. But all the while paying _careful_ attention
>>>>to the overall node counts on a wide range of test positions. A 1% speedup is
>>>>of no use at all if you introduce an error that happens once every billion
>>>>nodes. I can search that many nodes in 15 minutes. I can't stand errors that
>>>>frequently. I have what would probably be called a "zero-tolerance for errors"
>>>>in Crafty. If I make a change that should only make it faster or slower, then
>>>>the node counts must remain constant. If they don't I debug until I find out >why and fix it.
>>>
>>>This is a fantastic point. Maybe somewhat obvious to our more experienced
>>>members, but certainly words of wisdom for us newbies. So, my question is, what
>>>methods are you all using for profiling your code? How do you go about
>>>identifying and fixing your hotspots? Do you have a particular test suite you
>>>use, or what? Andrew
>>
>>I'm surprised Bob would say that profiling is important so soon in the
>>development process; perhaps there's some missing context.  Profiling is, imho,
>>about the last thing you'd want to do.
>>
>>1.  Fix bugs in movegen, using perft tests.
>>2.  Write a very simple, bug-free eval.
>>3.  Concentrate on move-ordering, which is crucial to making the tree small.
>>Develop methods for measuring the quality of your ordering, don't only look at
>>node counts.
>>
>>Don't spend a lot of time on arcane or new ideas until you're certain what you
>>have is bug-free.  Especially make sure your transposition code is simple and
>>effective, tons of problems result from bad hashing.
>
>It is clearly simple in the case of movei because I still do not use hash tables
>for pruning and I believe that a lot of improvement is possible even without it
>because I know that movei does not know a lot of things.
>
>All the versions that compete in tournaments until today know nothing about open
>files,knight outposts or backward pawns.
>
>I also know that except poor evaluation movei has poor order of moves and a lot
>of poor implementation relative to what is possible to do.
>
>For example Movei has no special function to generate only captures and it
>starts qsearch by generating all moves.
>
>Uri

Uri,

If I didn't know better from the above description I would assume movei was
a random move generator and not much more.  And yet, it keeps winning and
winning!  Perhaps we should hold a contest to determine who is the most
self-effacing programmer you, Tord or Matthew (of BigLion fame) ;-)

regards,
--tom

P.S. By the way, congrats on your showing in WBEC.



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.