Author: Anthony Cozzie
Date: 15:55:30 01/16/05
Go up one level in this thread
On January 16, 2005 at 17:18:36, chandler yergin wrote: >On January 16, 2005 at 12:16:53, Anthony Cozzie wrote: > >>Please find the error in one or more of these statements Chandler: >> >>1. A tablebase access takes at least 2-3 ms, even on a 15K SCSI hard drve. >> >>2. Most engines (except for Diep ;) have evaluations that take a few >>microseconds or so. >> >>3. Therefore a tablebase access is on the order of 1000X slower than calling the >>evaluation function. >> >>4. Since most of the time is spent in the evaluation function, this means if the >>programmer called tablebase_probe() at every node it would run 1000X slower, >>that is 1K nps instead of 1M nps in Zappa's case. > > >Quoting from a previous Post: > >How long does it take for your engine to find kf3 ? >[D]8/7R/1N2k1p1/P1p1b3/P3r3/7P/4K3/8 w - - 0 47 > >Yace almost immediately, loses it after some seconds. Finds it again after 3 >hours (when I lost patience). Is Kf3 the only winning move? > >Regards, >Dieter > > So...? We have you stateing time, and another Programmer stateing >almost immediately... > >Why wait 3 hours? Hmmmm? > >Is there ANY possible justification for this? >He also had to ask.. is Kf3 the only winning move? > >Is there any possible justification for him NOT knowing? > >The King only has 6 possible moves! >Examine tham all at the same time... > >Then, after a few seconds. or a minute..recognize the Computer has decided >on which is the best move, focus on that pV, and let it run... >Decrease the Lines to one, and the Scroll information as to time, and Nodes is >NOT Lost... you can still Clip the Ananysis and Paste.. > >> >>Note that we are talking about positions with (say) 8 pieces on the board; for >>example this KRPPPvKRP position. White wants to keep his passers together and >>win, Black hopes to split them and (possibly) draw. >> >>[D]8/8/r6k/6p1/6P1/5P1P/R6K/8 w - - 0 1 >> >>When a lot of people (experts especially) think something, it is usually good to >>at least consider their position. They might be wrong anyway, but they probably >>have at least some justification for their opinion. I get the feeling that you >>never read anything I write, but I keep trying for the sake of world (or at >>least forum) peace anyway :) >> >>anthony > > I do read what you write anthony, I wonder if you do the same for me. >Now please refute what I wrote, or try, and I'll listen carefully. >Thanks, Chan Chandler, its difficult for me to believe you read my post. I talked about tablebase probes, you talked about your continuing fixation on multiple PVs and how we are all morons for not using them. anthony
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.