Author: David B Weller
Date: 12:18:45 08/21/04
Go up one level in this thread
Hi Stuart, I follow your threads with great interest, for it seems we are at a similar level with our engines [I doubt as a programmer though] You may have addressed this once already: GES [my engine] is relatively slow, and thus prone to losing tactics. So I too use WACNEW.epd extensively to judge the merit of certain changes. But I have seen clearly, that what might increase correct answers, average depth, fail-high-1, branching factor, and any other metric I follow, will often make GES play worse. What I do, is just make sure the results from wacnew stay within a certain range [eg., >= 240 correct at 1sec/pos on AMD 1Ghz] and then test in some games with competitive opponents. Even if you only play a couple games, I think its safer, than making conclusions just after running wacnew. Ive seen this happen very clearly with GES. that'll be 0.02$, :) -David
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.