Author: Eric Oldre
Date: 11:35:50 07/11/04
[D]8/k7/3p4/p2P1p2/P2P1P2/8/8/K7 w - - 0 1
I ran my engine on the fine 70 position above. which Anthony Cozzie recommended
to me last night as a good position to test for transposition table issues.
below is my new engines analysis of the position.
(note, I'm not yet sure if I will call it "Murderhole2" or give it a completely
new name)
Murderhole2 release WB2 25 MB:
1 00:00 1.48 a1b1
2 00:00 1.40 a1b1 a7a8
3 00:00 1.45 a1b1 a7a8 b1c1
4 00:00 1.40 a1b1 a7b8 b1c1 b8c8
5 00:00 1.40 a1b1 a7b8 b1b2 b8c8 b2c1
6 00:00 1.40 a1b1 a7b8 b1b2 b8b7 b2c1 b7c8
7 00:00 1.40 a1b1 a7b8 b1b2 b8b7 b2b1 b7c8 b1c1
8 00:00 1.40 a1b1 a7b8 b1b2 b8b7 b2b1 b7b8 b1c1 c8b8
9 00:00 1.45 a1b2 a7a8 b2c1 a8b8 c1d2 b8c8 d2c2
10 00:00 1.40 a1b2 a7a8 b2c1 a8b8 c1d2 b8c8 d2c2 c8b7 c2c1 b7c8
11 00:00 1.45 a1a2 a7a6 a2b2 a6b6 b2c3 b6a7 c3d2 a7a8 d2c2 a8b8
12 00:00 1.42 a1a2 a7a6 a2b2 a6b6 b2c3 b6a7 c3d2 a7a8 d2c2 a8b8 c2d2 b8c8
13 00:00 1.47 a1b1 a7b7 b1c1 b7a8 c1d2 a8b8 d2e1 b8b7 e1f1 b7c8 f1g2
14 00:01 1.45 a1b1 a7b7 b1a1 b7c8 a1b2 c8b7 b2b3 b7c7 b3c4 c7b6 c4c3
15 00:02 1.47 a1a2 a7a8 a2b1 a8b8 b1a2 b8c8 a2a3 c8b8 a3b3 b8b7 b3b2
16 00:04 1.45 a1a2 a7b7 a2b2 b7c8 b2c3 c8b7 c3b2 b7c8 b2c3 c8b7 c3b2 b7c8
b2a1 c8c7 c1b1
17 00:08 1.48 a1b1 a7a8 b1c1 a8a7 c1d2 a7b6 d2e2 b6c7 e2f3 c7d8 f3e2
18 00:12 1.58 a1a2 a7a8 a2b2
19 00:35 1.60 a1b1 a7b8 b1c1 b8c8 c1c2 c8c7 c2d3 c7b6 d3e2 b6c7 e2e3 c7d8
e3d3 d8c7
20 01:12 1.62 a1b1 a7b7 b1c1 b7c7 c1b2 c7c8 b2c2 c8b7 a2b2 b8c8 b2c2 c8b7
a2b2 b8c8 b2c2 c8b8 a3b3 b8c7
21 03:51 1.62 a1b1 a7b7 b1c1 b7c7 c1b2 c7c8 b2a2 c8b8 a2a1 b8b7 a1b1 b7a7
b1c1 a7b7
it does eventually at depth 19 decide on the correct answer of a1b1. however, it
looks like it is simply it trying to avoid the draw by repitition and counts
itself as ahead due to it's extra pawn. it doesn't get a crushing score at this
depth at all.
at this point the eval function is simply static material and piece/square value
tables, i hope to add more advanced techniques this week.
I'm looking for some advice in interpreting these results.
a) did I just not let it search deep enough?
b) does the fact that it took 3:51 to reach depth 21 indictate a issue with my
tranposition table? it was running at 1,200,000 nodes/sec.
if there is a issue with my transposition table, could it be due to not having
random enough keys? here is the code i'm using to generate the numbers.
U64 rand64(){
U64 retval = 0;
retval = (retval <<15) | rand();
retval = (retval <<15) | rand();
retval = (retval <<15) | rand();
retval = (retval <<15) | rand();
retval = (retval <<15) | rand();
return retval;
};
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.