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 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.