Author: Inmann Werner
Date: 01:48:43 08/26/99
Go up one level in this thread
On August 26, 1999 at 04:31:40, Bruce Moreland wrote: > >On August 26, 1999 at 03:23:43, Inmann Werner wrote: > >>Hello >> >>When I began to implement hashing, I tried to use all "tricks" to avoid draws >>by repetition going into the hash tables, because I thought, this would be very >>bad. >>Yesterday I disabled this code and let also the draw by repetition evals into >>the hash tables, and surprisingly, the program worked better (at the complete >>LCTII Test) >> >>Do you also let "draw by repetition evals" into your hash tables? > >It so happens that in mine is it as easy to avoid as to not avoid, so I avoid >it. I doubt it matters much. > >If you avoid it, you still have path-dependent scores in your hash table, which >will cause search instabilities. > >As far as I can tell it is impossible to avoid this without hashing the entire >path taken to get to the position, which is insane and likely wrong. > >bruce I did it, setting the eval of draw per repetition to 1, a value my eval can not produce, and not allowing any 1 to be put in hash or got from. But through cutoffs and similar things, the "draw per repetition" influences the hash entrys anyway!? . When I let the "draw per repetition" evals be put in hash and used, in most position there was no change. But in positions, where I stand lost, but there are chances do come to draw, they got solved much quicker. ??? Werner
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.