Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 23:28:26 07/20/99
Go up one level in this thread
On July 20, 1999 at 11:25:07, Dan Homan wrote: >On July 20, 1999 at 08:52:18, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >> >>Let's however write down some facts why my prog is unhappy with MTD. >>It's up to others to generalize it to their progs: >> >> - the huge number of researches needed. In DIEP my evaluation is nowadays >> in 1/1000 of a pawn. For a long time i had 1/200 of a pawn (in the time >> i experimented with MTD), but now i have 1/1000 of a pawn. So a drop >> of 0.20 pawn, which is a normal drop in DIEP, is in fact a drop of 200 >> points. Happy researching! > >Even if the score dropped a whole pawn (1000 points in DIEP), this would >only be 10 or 11 zero-width searches (2^10 = 1024) assuming that you Man 10 or 11 researches, are you reading what you write? 10 or 11 researches. In 10 or 11 researches with PVS i should search 11 ply deep with some luck! IN PVS getting PV is very smartly with unlimited window. NO RESEARCHES NEEDED! My proggie directly picks a line with a reasonable good alfa, so it's not wasting much nodes on this. Of course 10 or 11 researches with MTD means first 9 or 10 researches i'm wasting bigtime nodes! >bound the score in an efficient manner. Also, I can understand having >a high resolution within the eval routine itself, but does it really help >to have the output of the eval be in 1/1000 pawn units? I wouldn't trust >the sum total of any eval routine to 0.001 pawns! Maybe you could >output the total eval in units of 1/100 of a pawn (or even less). > >Actually, that is an interesting question. Does anyone know what the >optimum eval unit is for searching? I am talking here only about what >the eval outputs - not the unit used internally for calculating the eval. >I know that most programs use the same unit for both purposes, but I >wonder if that is really optimum. > > - Dan
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.