Author: Stuart Cracraft
Date: 08:08:48 01/06/06
Go up one level in this thread
On January 06, 2006 at 10:47:22, Uri Blass wrote: >On January 06, 2006 at 10:42:14, Laszlo Gaspar wrote: > >>On January 06, 2006 at 10:21:21, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On January 06, 2006 at 07:19:47, Joseph Ciarrochi wrote: >>> >>>>If you run tournments limiting ply to 3, Rybka absolutely kills fruit and >>>>fritz9. >>>>Rybka sure forms a good first impression.:) >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> 1 2 3 >>>>1 Rybka 1.0 Beta 32-bit **** 94.0 - 7.0 94.5 - 6.5 >>>>189.5/203 >>>>2 Fritz 9 7.0 - 94.0 *** 58.5 - 42.5 >>>>77.0/220 >>>>3 Fruit 2.2 6.5 - 94.5 42.5 - 58.5 ** >>>>55.5/221 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>These numbers seem so imbalanced. I wonder if there is not some sort of bug in >>>>the fritz gui or something. >>>> >>>>best >>>>Joseph >>> >>>Your title is misleading so I changed it in my reply. >>>My opinion is that Rybka searches x+2 plies when it claims to search x plies. >>> >>>From my experience it can see at fixed depth of 1 ply things that other programs >>>see at fixed depth of 3 plies >>> >>>Here is an example >>> >>>[D]3k2r1/ppb5/3p4/r2N1p2/8/8/1P6/1K2RB1R b - - 0 1 >>>[D]3k2r1/pp1b4/3p4/r2N1p2/8/8/1P6/1K2RB1R b - - 0 1 >>> >>>Rybka does not capture the knight at depth 1 in the first case but capture the >>>knight ar depth 1 in the second case. >>> >>>Can Vasik explain why? >>> >>>evaluation? >>>I do not believe it. >>> >>>It must be search and rybka search after Rxd5 Bc4 black move and see that in the >>>first case no move save black from a loss of full rook when in the second case >>>it searches Rxd5 Bc4 Bc6 >>> >>>Uri >>Hi all, >> >>It's clearly seen that Rybka uses some form of selective search different from >>others' in the quescence search which is not a full width search, therefore is >>not counted in nps. This explains the low nps, Rybka does extra work in the QS >>which pays off. >>Obvious, that a usual 1 ply search cannot be such better even with a superb >>evaluation but a Rybka-type can be. >> >>Regards, >>László > >No > >It is not clear > >I can achieve the same effect by not counting nodes in the qsearch and writing >depth x when the real depth is x+2 > >It is possible that rybka does nothing special except playing better when vasik >tries to hide what it does by misleading information. > >Uri >Uri And this type of misunderstanding is why testing of fixed depth is useless. It is like the argument of whose nodes-per-second is better. Please, everybody use fixed time! Stuart
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.