Author: Uri Blass
Date: 08:50:20 06/30/04
Go up one level in this thread
On June 30, 2004 at 11:30:19, Stuart Cracraft wrote: >Hi -- I threw together a quick chess program in the past 3 >weeks to do some research and recently added a testsuite >capability to at least get some measure of QA for changes. > >I then ran testsuite on the program at about 12-13 seconds >per move against Win-at-Chess (300 positions) on a slow >(for these days) PC (1ghz P3 w/ 512mb). > >To my surprise, Verified Null Move with R=3 scored better >without transposition table than with. Transposition table was >set to 0.5M entries in all cases. > >See below where #3 result is greater than all the others. >It's puzzling to me why transposition table should reduce >the result for #3 down to the level of #5. > >Has anyone else seen this with their program or programs >in general? It is most puzzling/counter-intuitive to me. Did you try using hash table only for order of moves. Movei did not "believe" in using them for pruning even before implementing verified null move pruning. movei's search and movei's evaluation is dependent on the path and not only on the searched position so the result is not something that seems impossible to me. Uri
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.