Author: Tord Romstad
Date: 12:15:49 02/21/05
Go up one level in this thread
Hi Dann! On February 21, 2005 at 13:40:37, Dann Corbit wrote: >This is on the 2.2 GHz 64 bit computer (which had fewer problems than the slower >machine). The first set is the raw data, and the second set has had all >duplicate games removed. > > Program Elo + - Games Score Av.Op. Draws >1 Polyglot fruit-book : 2553 31 35 372 59.9 % 2483 18.3 % >2 Polyglot glaurung-book : 2540 32 35 372 57.5 % 2487 16.7 % >3 Polyglot glaurung-no-book: 2481 32 34 372 46.2 % 2507 16.7 % >4 Polyglot fruit-no-book : 2427 40 29 372 36.3 % 2525 14.0 % > > Program Elo + - Games Score Av.Op. Draws >1 Polyglot fruit-book : 2550 32 37 348 59.3 % 2484 17.5 % >2 Polyglot glaurung-book : 2536 33 35 363 56.7 % 2489 16.5 % >3 Polyglot glaurung-no-book: 2483 33 36 343 46.9 % 2505 16.9 % >4 Polyglot fruit-no-book : 2430 41 30 354 36.9 % 2524 12.7 % > >It seems that Fruit may benefit from a book slightly more than glaurung. This is a big surprise to me. Glaurung has a very primitive development eval, and no mobility at all except some very simple stuff for bishops. I thought it would be completely unable to find good opening moves on its own. Perhaps the explanation simply is that stronger engines tend to profit more from playing with a book, as Sandro has suggested. It could also be related to the relative strengths and weaknesses of the two programs. When I run test matches between Fruit and Glaurung, I have noticed that the Glaurung's scores most of its wins in the middle game, while Fruit tends to win most endgames. Perhaps playing without a book reduces Fruit's chances of reaching the endgame. Thanks for doing this experiment, and for your nice choice of engines for the experiment! :-) Tord
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.