Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 10:52:16 01/12/05
Go up one level in this thread
On January 12, 2005 at 11:15:22, Uri Blass wrote: >On January 12, 2005 at 08:21:58, Norm Pollock wrote: > >>On January 12, 2005 at 07:43:57, Norm Pollock wrote: >> >>Then there is other matter of wear and tear on >>>the disk drives. >> >>Let me clarify this. 5 man egtb starts disk accessing with as many as 14 pieces >>still on the board in a blitz game. >> >>When there are only 5 pieces or less, then there is hardly any disk access and >>egtbs are clearly better than searching. >> >>But for 6-14 pieces on the board, disk accessing is taking away time >>(substantial time in blitz) from searching (and wearing out your disk drive). I >>think egtbs are likely a disadvantage to a strong program when there are 6-14 >>pieces on the board, but are an advantage with 5 (or less) pieces on the board. > >Nobody force programs to access the disk when there are 6-14 pieces >I expect programmers who are intelligent enough to make their program probe the >tablebases to be also intelligent enough to not probe the tablebases if it is a >disadvantage. > >I got permission to use the nalimov tablebases as long as movei is not >commercial and my first implementation is probably going to be using it only >when there are 5 or less pieces in the board. I think it wise to test at least the pv also, when the pv has 5 men or less in it. Even if it is 100 plies long, that is only 100 probes and completely insignificant for time.
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.