Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 10:15:16 08/11/99
Go up one level in this thread
On August 10, 1999 at 18:42:58, Tom King wrote: >On August 09, 1999 at 20:41:50, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On August 09, 1999 at 17:51:01, Tom King wrote: >> >>>On August 08, 1999 at 21:35:46, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>[snip] >>>> >>>> >>>>I've been doing a 'hybrid' for nearly a year... R=3 fairly close to the >>>>root, R=2 beyond some threshold that I don't remember what it is... >>>> >>>> >>> >>>Interesting.. better than pure R=2 or pure R=3? I did some experiments a while >>>back, using R=3 on the opponent's move, and R=2 on the computers move (idea >>>being - let's not cover up the opponent's threats, and if we miss some of our >>>threats, well, so be it). But it was more or less a 'wash'. >> >> >>I started playing with this after Paris, as someone said that Frans (or someone) >>was fiddling around with R=3. Bruce and I played a few games one night with >>Ferret vs Crafty, with bruce using R=3, and we saw _no_ gross mistakes on his >>part. In fact, we couldn't tell the difference (at least R=3 was not making >>mistakes that R=2 wasn't). >> >>But I never felt comfortable with raw R=3, as R=2 causes more than enough >>problems already, thank you very much. :) >> >>Ernst is writting an ICCA paper describing some experiments he did with this >>(totally unconnected with my tests). Wait for his paper to hit the journal as >>he has some good data... And I am not yet sure that this is a good idea, but I >>have been running it a good while and it has been in the distributed Crafty for >>quite a while as well and no one has complained. Of course, now that everyone >>knows, look out. :) > >One thing's for sure - I'm sure there's a lot more we could all be doing with >the null move. Playing around with different values of R, depending on depth in >the tree, alpha and beta etc. etc. I look forward to this paper. Ernst has been >productive of late..I'm sure I'm not the only one to enjoy reading his articles. >[even if his damn program does kill mine at the WCCC ;-)] i did for many years first nullmove R=3 then R=2 (since 1995 i toy with this), and it solved many tricks for me in the known testsets. However practically R=3 always gives more speedup so i'm using everywhere R=3 now. >Cheers, >Tom.
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.