Author: Larry Griffiths
Date: 20:01:08 02/12/99
Go up one level in this thread
On February 12, 1999 at 01:57:01, Komputer Korner wrote: >In Henri Arsenault's Games Domain review of Fritz 5-16 bit he states that "After >each variation is analyzed, the hash table is emptied, so this is a much more >efficient way to analyze a game." I say Oh REALLY ???!!!!!!!!!! >Any correct hash table info (even a full one) is better than no hash info. When >the hash table is full, programs implement a replace hash algorithm which >determines ( many programs have 2 hash tables or even 3 if you count the pawn >hash table) which hash entries get knocked out. If a hash entry is not there >(got knocked out) and that position at the same depth comes up again, then the >program of course has to calulate the score over again. BUT if it doesn't get >knocked out then time is saved. That is the whole purpose of a hash table. I >realize that initializing the hash table takes cpu time, but whether the hash >table is full or empty at the beginning of the move should not affect this. >Therefore I wonder why the Fritz and Junior engines do this. Don't they play a >little weaker because of this practice? >-- >Komputer Korner I am still trying to get the hash table to work in my program and am currently clearing the hash tables after every iteration. In theory, I agree with You and Bob Hyatt. My program seems to make stupid moves when the hash table is included, but makes exceptionally stupid moves when I do not clear the hash table. I am looking for bugs in my hashtable code at this time. Larry :o)
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.