Author: J. Wesley Cleveland
Date: 11:35:58 07/20/99
Go up one level in this thread
On July 20, 1999 at 12:12:14, Dann Corbit wrote: >I think it would be interesting to benchmark chess algorithms: >0. Move generators -- all types >1. Alpha-Beta vs MTD(f) >2. Bitboards vs 0x88 >3. etc. > >Prepare a large crosstable and do a large number of runs with as many >implementations as possible and under as many different conditions as possible. > >Change the search time from very short searches (10 sec or less) up to half an >hour to find the bit O(f(n)) properties of the algorithms. > >A systematic study might eliminate a lot of guesswork or even tell us *where* >certain algorithms work better than others. For instance, we might use one >algorithm at a certain time control and a different algorithm at a longer time >control and yet another at correspondence chess time controls. I like this idea. Perhaps we could start with TSCP, completely modularize it(so we could plug in different searches, board representations, etc.) and completely define the interfaces so that each is completely independent from the others. Then experts with each of the different types could contribute functions, and we could plug them in and benchmark.
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.