Author: Uri Blass
Date: 10:52:31 02/20/05
Go up one level in this thread
On February 19, 2005 at 23:16:41, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On February 19, 2005 at 20:51:15, Peter Skinner wrote: > >>On February 19, 2005 at 20:26:02, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>Note there are "6 man egtbs" and there are "new 6 man egtbs". The new ones >>>require an updated egtb.cpp, which is not going to be a part of any engine that >>>is over a month old, as that is when the new egtb.cpp was released... >> >>This brings up a good question. Is it safe to mix old and new 6 man egtbs >>together? >> >>Or will they all be converted to the new format? >> >>Peter > > >Format isn't new. Just the old EGTB probe code has some egtbs flagged as 8 bits >when they have to be 16 bits. The format for all files is exactly the same >except for this, and we've had 16 bit tables already. Any that have a mate in >over 125 or 126 (not sure which) require 16 bits for the scores. Why 16 bits? I think that if there is no mate in 255 or longer mate 9 bits can be enough I also do not understand why mate in 126 means that 8 bits are not enough mate in 1,....mate in 126(126 scores) loss in 0,loss in 1,...loss in 126(127 scores) draw(1 score) number of possible scores is 254 that is smaller than 256 so it seems that 8 bits are enough. Uri
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.