Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 08:11:51 01/01/06
Go up one level in this thread
On January 01, 2006 at 06:12:31, Uri Blass wrote: >On January 01, 2006 at 05:24:30, Alessandro Damiani wrote: > >>On January 01, 2006 at 02:36:28, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On December 31, 2005 at 20:50:30, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>> >>>>On December 31, 2005 at 20:20:47, Greg Simpson wrote: >>>> >>>>>Vasik had very logical and persuave ideas. I particularly liked the point that >>>>>trading one third speed searching for twenty times the evauation per position >>>>>almost has to be good if done right. >>>> >>>>If that describes what he's doing then it seems however Vasik has taken the >>>>other way around, the junior way. The utmost minimum of knowledge in leafs. >>> >>>I do not understand this comparison. >>> >>>Rybka is a slow searcher and Junior is a fast searcher. >>>What is the reason that you think that rybka has minimum of knowledge in leafs? >>> >>>Uri >> >>How do you know Rybka is a slow searcher? Just by looking at its obfuscated >>nps?? For instance, in >> >>[D]8/8/pppppppK/NBBR1NRp/nbbrqnrP/PPPPPPPk/8/Q7 w - - 0 1 >> >>do you really think it takes quite long to find the mate in 1 because of a huge >>static analysis? ;) >> >>Alessandro > >In this case it does not show nodes per second but in the following position >it shows nodes per second > >[D]8/8/pppppppK/NBBRQNRp/nbbrqnrP/PPPPPPPk/8/8 w - - 0 1 > >Analysis by Rybka 1.0 Beta 32-bit: > >1.dxe4 > +- (2.46) Depth: 3 00:02:22 >1.dxe4 > +- (2.46) Depth: 4 00:03:01 >1.dxe4 dxe5 > +- (2.46) Depth: 5 00:05:22 >1.Qxd4 Qxd5 > +- (2.77) Depth: 5 00:06:16 >1.Qxd4 dxc5 2.Qxe4 > +- (3.06) Depth: 6 00:08:19 4kN >1.Qxd4 dxc5 2.Qxe4 Bxd5 > +- (3.06) Depth: 7 00:12:59 18kN > >(, 01.01.2006) > >For some reason it searches only 4000 nodes in 499 seconds. >This really seem strange that static analysis takes so much time > >I could believe 100,000 nodes per seconds on My A3000 and even 10,000 nodes per >seconds but less than 10 nodes per second is even too much for me to believe. > >It seems that Vasik searches many nodes in what he counts as nodes. >Maybe he is using different function and not using his normal makemove in the >qsearch but it is clear that he searches a lot of legal moves inside of what he >considers as evaluation so I cannot consider it as evaluation. > >I think that static analysis can consider trapped pieces so you can consider >some moves without making them to check for trapped pieces but what I see in >rybka is clearly too much for what I consider as static analysis. > >I think that recursive search of moves with more than one move per side cannot >be considered as part of the evaluation. > >Uri Were I guessing, I'd guess there is no counting of any kind for q-search nodes. And if he uses a search to sort the ply-1 move list (as I do) then that search (captures-only) is huge for this position, before I even get to the iteration-1 search depth.
This page took 0.01 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.