Author: Ricardo Gibert
Date: 13:40:41 02/16/00
Go up one level in this thread
On February 16, 2000 at 16:08:06, Ian Osgood wrote: [snip] > >This is a common complaint against the entire Genius line of programs: at blitz >speeds they play mostly solid positional chess, with the occasional gaffe. The >cause is the selective search Lang uses. Genius only generates a handful of >moves for itself and *all* the responses for the opponent (which is why the PV >advances in depth by 2 each iteration). This leads to conservative play, and >the occasional "blind spot". Interesting. I wonder how Lang goes about making Genius "selective". Does he do the normal move ordering stuff and truncate the list of moves looked at or does he do something else? > >I think Lang used his Roma engine unmodified because 1) it was already written >in 68000 assembly, 2) it was designed for slow hardware, 3) it was the last of >his dedicated programs not to use a hash table, and 4) by using the engine >unmodified, he could claim that PalmGenius is a world champion program (which it >was in 1987). One should remember that Roma was sold in 1987, when *all* >processors were slow. The design of his search takes that into account. > >I have found that at faster speeds (2 sec/move) PlamGenius is competitive with a >more modern portable unit, the Sapphire II. His selective search gets deep >enough quickly enough to offset the Sapphire's hash tables (not so effective at >short depths). This advantage seems to dissipate at longer time controls. >Also, the opening book of the registered PalmGenius is still rather small >compared to the Sapphire II, a shortcoming I expect to be resolved in the Pro >version. > >Ian
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.