Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: An Experiment that disproves Hyatt's 1000X NPS Theory

Author: Uri Blass

Date: 10:16:00 09/17/05

Go up one level in this thread


On September 17, 2005 at 12:49:06, Ryan B. wrote:

>I thought this rediculess theory was proven wrong with the Crafty vs Rebel thing
>a long time ago.
  It is far more complicated than just the NPS loss in move
>ording, pruning, reduction checks, and extention checks that all can improve a
>program while reducing the NPS.  As well what is known by the eval function and
>how it is used can be much more valuable than even another few ply searched but
>causing a very large loss in NPS.  Hiarcs on slow hardware vs GNU Chess on fast
>hardware should show a good example of this.

GNU cannot prove nothing because Hyatt never claimed that GNU is going to win
with fast hardware against hiarcs on slow hardware.

If the idea is to use weak programs then I see no reason to use gnu and not use
weaker programs.

It is clear that usually long time control help the stronger program and I found
in the past that weak Movei00_7a was better than tscp with 5:1 time handicap at
long time control but not at bullet.

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.