Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Major Bug In Pro Deo 1.0. .... Help ED

Author: Ed Schröder

Date: 01:06:16 08/11/04

Go up one level in this thread


On August 11, 2004 at 03:34:13, Ed Schröder wrote:

>On August 10, 2004 at 23:08:35, Mark Young wrote:
>
>>On August 10, 2004 at 19:13:44, Ed Schröder wrote:
>>
>>>On August 10, 2004 at 12:43:19, Ed Schröder wrote:
>>>
>>>>On August 10, 2004 at 11:54:33, Mark Young wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On August 10, 2004 at 11:15:30, Ed Schröder wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On August 10, 2004 at 09:08:13, Mark Young wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Ed, Pro Deo 1 is having a problem with understanding time controls. I have
>>>>>>>posted Pro Deo 1.O games below in the current test I am running. As you may know
>>>>>>>in my test at 40 moves in 2 hours and 20 in 1 hour time controls. Pro Deo 1.0
>>>>>>>only scored 1/2 point out of 5.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>When I went to look at the game I found out why.... From move 1 to 40 Pro Deo
>>>>>>>1.0 would use the time control correctly.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Between moves 40 and 60 Pro Deo 1 would only use 1 sec per move.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>This is a correct observation already known from Rebel 12. You are probably
>>>>>>playing 40/2hr 20/1hr 1hr/all. The engine can't handle this and starts to play
>>>>>>at 1 second per move, no surprise it has only 0.5/5.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I suggest you to use 40/2hr 20/1hr 20/1hr.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Sorry for all the wasted time!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Ed, Then the problem is worse in Pro Deo. Look at my Time control from the games
>>>>>below. I used 40/2hr 20/1hr 20/1hr. See Below.
>>>>>
>>>>>****[TimeControl "40/7200:20/3600:20/3600"]****
>>>>
>>>>I see.
>>>
>>>
>>>>I assume you are using the CB interface. If so zero all items of the 3th time
>>>>control. I never had any problems.
>>>
>>>This is also not sufficient.
>>>
>>>I think it is better to wait for a bug-fix version, this is a bug with very
>>>unpleasant consequences.
>>>
>>>Ed
>
>>Yes, I agree. No need to test if you are going to fix and/or update the program.
>
>
>I did some testing and it seems that changing the following wb2uci.eng parameter
>does the trick:
>
>LevelExtend = none  ->  LevelExtend = strict
>
>I will do some more testing with other time controls as well, in the meantime I
>think it is safe to restart your testing with that change.
>
>My best,
>
>Ed


Mark,

I would like to take this back, just leave wb2uci.eng unchanged. Instead of that
make time-contol-1 equal to time-control-2 and the problem disappears.

So:  40/2hr+40/2hr or 20/1hr+20/1hr

Zero the 3th time control.

As far as I know problems like these don't happen in ChessPartner.

I will make a note on my pages.

My best,

Ed



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.