Author: David Dahlem
Date: 12:57:58 10/06/04
Go up one level in this thread
On October 06, 2004 at 15:25:16, Peter Skinner wrote: >On October 06, 2004 at 14:52:46, Peter Berger wrote: > >>On October 06, 2004 at 13:46:54, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On October 06, 2004 at 10:45:46, Tony Hedlund wrote: >>> >>>>On October 06, 2004 at 08:32:20, Mike Byrne wrote: >>>> >>>>>Alpha Pocket Crafty 19.17 SE in alpha stage. It is playing within a GUI , will >>>>>have most ofthe SE features. >>>>> >>>>>Personality Opening Books - Plan is now to generate opening books that will >>>>>just about every move the "real" personality played in their games for about the >>>>>first 20 - 25 moves. Of course, you have to play what their opponents played >>>>>for it to stay in the personality book. Fischer personality book will be >>>>>completed first. It is very cool. It really give you a sense of the openings >>>>>the personality played. >>>> >>>>Hi Mike, >>>> >>>>In the Arena Event Forum they say that 19.17 is weaker then earlier 19.xx >>>>versions. Is that true? >>>> >>>>Tony >>> >>>I do not believe that, no. The changes from earlier 19.x versions are so >>>small... >>> >>>you will still find some that say fritz 5 is the best, that crafty 15.x is >>>better than new versions, etc... lots of opinions. I believe the current >>>crafty is the best one so far, personally... >> >>At least when it is about posted results of 19.15 and 19.17, there is some >>evidence that 19.17 is weaker. >> >>Although I didn't collect them I realized that 19.17 was consistently doing >>worse in all results posted. > > >I think the main reason for that is flawed testing, testing on 1 pc with ponder >on.... > >Most people do not use the correct books, proper rc file settings, and well just >about anything else that can go wrong. In my testing, i use the same books, same rc file settings, same time controls, etc. and 19.17 does seem weaker to me. Regards Dave > >We have seen it many times on this forum the horrible testing systems people >use, and just how flawed they are. > >Crafty 19.15 - 19.17 is almost the same engine. I don't see how it is possible >that 19.15 would be stronger. > >From main.c: > >* 19.15 fix to outside passed pawn code that requires pawns on both sides * > * of the board for the side with an "outside passer" or "outside * > * candidate" to avoid some bizarre evaluations. sel 0/0 now works * > * without crashing Crafty. this would fail in previous versions as * > * the hash signature would be modified but not restored. slightly * > * more conservative limit on using null-move search to head off a * > * few notable zugzwang problems was added. fix to time control * > * code to remove a hole that could cause a divide-by-zero at a time * > * control boundary. Stonewall detection removed completely as it * > * appears to be no longer needed. rook scoring changed to better * > * evaluate "open files" by measuring mobility on them. complete * > * removal of Phase() (phase.c) and references to the opening, * > * middlegame and endgame phases as they were no longer referenced * > * anywhere in the code. * > * * > * 19.16 fix to "Trojan code" to eliminate the time limit exclusion since * > * many users still have old and slow hardware, and the time limit * > * was not set correctly when PreEvaluate() was called anyway. the * > * code to display fail-high/fail-low information was cleaned up so * > * that the +1 or +3 now makes sense from the black side where the * > * score is really going down (good for black) rather than showing * > * a +3 fail high (when Crafty is black) and the score is really * > * going to drop (get better for black). Now the fail-high-fail-low * > * +/- sign is also relative to +=good for white like the scores * > * have been for years. adjustments to pawn evaluation terms to * > * improve the scoring balance. "new" now terminates parallel * > * threads (they will be re-started when needed) so that we don't * > * burn CPU time when not actually playing a game. * > * * > * 19.17 changes to pawn evaluation to limit positional scores that could * > * get a bit out of sane boundaries in some positions. * > * * > ******************************************************************************* > >Really there is the removal of useless code, and fixs to scoring. That is about >it. Nothing significant between the two. > >Peter
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.