Author: James T. Walker
Date: 19:41:57 06/24/99
Go up one level in this thread
On June 24, 1999 at 22:28:26, Mark Young wrote: >On June 24, 1999 at 20:04:29, James T. Walker wrote: > >>Hello, >>Another way to prove it retains the hash tables is to turn off the permanent >>brain (Pondering). Then when playing a game, notice the depth of search and how >>long it takes to finda a move. When you play a move you will notice that Hiarcs >>does not start it's search a 1 ply but may start its search at 5/8 or something >>like that with 00:00:00 time showing taken for search. This indicates it is >>using information from a previous search stored in the hash tables. This is why >>Hiarcs has an advantage in engine/engine testing. The Pondering is turned off >>for both engines but since Hiarcs does not reset it's hash tables it has >>information left over to start the next search. But notice it's opponents >>(Fritz,Junior,Nimzo) have to start every search from ply 1 even when the >>predicted move is made. >>Jim Walker > >I have not seen this, but I have not looked for it in engine vs engine games to >see if it does retain hash from the previous search. > >To be honest I don't see this giving Hiarcs7 such a big advantage over the other >programs at longer time controls, not to the extent that I see from other >results that have been posted. ************ I think some people reported early results when Hiarcs was doing good. Only a long time and large amount of games can probe much about program strength. Of course Blitz test will tell a lot in a short time since I can run at least 100 games a day. Did you see my Blitz results? I only ran 50 games in the engine/engine test and the results were Hiarcs came out stronger than in the auto232 test. As far as I can see it is the only explanation for Hiarcs beating Fritz in engine/engine testing. ************* > >In my testing so far it has lost the blitz match I played at 10 secs. a move. >It did crush Fritz 5, but junior 5 is giving it all it can handle at 30 secs a >move, and 90 secs a move in the head to head match that I am playing now. ************* You have probabley been told this before but it bears repeating. Playing games at "10 seconds/move" is dubious because different programs have different interpretations of this. Some take great latitude with this type time control since it is not "Law". There are no lost games on time for instance so why not take longer if needed? By contrast in my 200 game match between Hiarcs/Fritz, Fritz lost 6 games on time. ************* > >And a quick note to Uri, Unless Hiarcs 7.32 is weaker then Hiarcs 7.01 or just >got "lucky" I don't see how from the games so far... why Hiarcs 7.01 crushed >Junior 5 in the SSDF testing. ************* I have this question in the back of my mind all the time. I don't own Hiarcs 7 so I can't test it. I would like to hear from someone who has both programs and has actually tested them not just against each other but each against identical competition. *********** Jim Walker ***********
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.