Author: Stuart Cracraft
Date: 11:25:19 09/19/04
Go up one level in this thread
On September 19, 2004 at 13:32:01, Michael Henderson wrote: >On September 19, 2004 at 11:10:14, Stuart Cracraft wrote: > >>Hi -- I am looking for 2 or 3 beta testers who would receive >>(full) source code to my program and in return would provide >>input and comments about improving the search. They would >>simply agree not to redistribute it and in fact discard it after >>a week or two of looking at it (and commenting.) The program is in C, >>5000 lines. The search and quiescence routines are 600 lines total. >> >>The reason I am considering this is due to hitting a brick wall at 249/300 >>on WAC for several weeks now and knowing there are things I just cannot >>find or go further with. The above score is at 1 second per position on a >>1ghz P3 with a small transposition table. I am told that 270-300 is considered >>"good" for this time control on this test. On this same machine >>at the same time setting, with WAC, Crafty gets 270/300. >> >>The kind of beta testers I'm looking for are experienced programmers >>who have written their own program and it has long since graduated >>from Win-at-Chess as a test suite, perhaps scoring 270 or above at >>1 second per move on a Pentium III 1ghz or above. To them, WAC has >>become ho-hum and in fact they are currently just sitting on their >>laurels without a lot of major advances. Their program has "matured." >>They see themselves as senior chess programmers helping less >>experienced authors. >> >>What I would favor >> >> 1) beta tester with solid program agrees to simultaneous exchange >> of source code >> >> --and-- >> >> 2) beta tester agrees to seriously review the quiesce(), search(), >> store(), retrieve(), and iterate() functions. >> >>I am fine to sign any non-disclosure agreement. >> >>This is just an attempt to break through a brick wall. >> >>Stuart > >Ok this is really just a joke Stuart, but what results do you get for 2 second >searches? If you do get better results, then a 2x slower solve rate nothing to >be worried about esp if under 2 secs :) > >Michael I see the joke and it is amusing. Humor is needed because I am feeling down about the program, obviously. However, with a small extension change today, the new result is now, finally 250/300 at 1 second per move on the PIII 1ghz with a 500,000 entry hash table (don't ask why I can't increase this, or else I will answer!) At 2 seconds per move it is 258/300. So this is not a speedup issue. It is a search issue that is holding me back. That's the point of my post. There are things I'm doing that are wrong and I can no longer see them. C'est la vie? Stuart
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.