| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Don Dailey
Joined: 29 Apr 2008 Posts: 4323
|
Post subject: Re: Verification search Posted: Tue Jun 26, 2012 11:09 am |
|
|
| diep wrote: |
| lkaufman wrote: |
| Are you saying that Houdini is 4x faster than Ivanhoe at seeing tactics in general, or is it specifically on tactics involving attacking the king? I know of one or two changes in Houdini that help see king-attack tactics, but I believe they have almost no measurable elo-benefit. |
It' s a mix of tough positions where a difficult (for computers) best move has to be found, from games mine mostly that i collected over the years.
Ranging from a better move in openingspositions to just mating the opponents king to exchange sacrafices in order to positionally win the game.
All those Fruit/Rybka clones have usually near 100% identical evaluation,
with piece square tables and material evaluation. In fact most have very little passed pawn logics in evaluation. Everything well tuned.
So most of the elo difference then is not evaluation yet search.
Small differences in search you see have hundreds of elopoints impact then.
The most important observation there is that getting more plies that hardly increase the chance of finding a better move hardly is losing it from changes that pick up more. Typically you see such changes in search that pick up more lose you a ply or 2, yet it's elowise a lot stronger.
But well look realistic around, ivanhoe is doing futility last 10 plies or so. How would you expect that to increase playstrength that much?
If i'd do last 10 plies futility in Diep i'm also gonna get 30 plies deep each move, but i bet i lose 300 elopoints  |
You have to do what works for the ELO. We prune pretty heavily too and we are aggressive with reductions. But if we don't do that we lose ELO. We don't care how many ply of search we get, we only care about how strong it plays. _________________ "Your superior intellect is no match for our puny weapons." -Kang and Kodos |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
| Subject |
Author |
Date/Time |
Verification search |
Lucas Braesch |
Thu Jun 14, 2012 1:07 pm |
Re: Verification search |
Robert Hyatt |
Thu Jun 14, 2012 1:19 pm |
Re: Verification search |
Pawel Koziol |
Thu Jun 14, 2012 2:54 pm |
Re: Verification search |
Lucas Braesch |
Fri Jun 15, 2012 4:00 am |
Re: Verification search |
Eelco de Groot |
Fri Jun 15, 2012 12:54 pm |
Re: Verification search |
Daniel Homan |
Fri Jun 15, 2012 3:00 pm |
Re: Verification search |
Lucas Braesch |
Sat Jun 16, 2012 3:18 am |
Re: Verification search |
Vincent Diepeveen |
Thu Jun 21, 2012 2:47 pm |
Re: Verification search |
Larry Kaufman |
Sat Jun 23, 2012 5:06 am |
Re: Verification search |
Vincent Diepeveen |
Sun Jun 24, 2012 10:32 am |
Re: Verification search |
Larry Kaufman |
Sun Jun 24, 2012 2:40 pm |
Re: Verification search |
Vincent Diepeveen |
Tue Jun 26, 2012 10:40 am |
Re: Verification search |
Don Dailey |
Tue Jun 26, 2012 11:09 am |
Very minor verification search modification. |
Eelco de Groot |
Tue Jun 26, 2012 4:47 pm |
Re: Very minor verification search modification. |
Vincent Diepeveen |
Wed Jun 27, 2012 1:30 am |
Re: Verification search |
Vincent Diepeveen |
Sat Jun 16, 2012 2:58 pm |
Re: Verification search |
Karlo Bala Jr. |
Fri Jun 15, 2012 7:30 am |
Re: Verification search |
Lucas Braesch |
Fri Jun 15, 2012 11:02 am |
Re: Verification search |
Pawel Koziol |
Fri Jun 15, 2012 12:13 pm |
Re: Verification search |
Karlo Bala Jr. |
Fri Jun 15, 2012 1:58 pm |
Re: Verification search |
J. Wesley Cleveland |
Sat Jun 16, 2012 12:12 am |
Re: Verification search |
Don Dailey |
Sat Jun 16, 2012 10:32 pm |
Re: Verification search |
Lucas Braesch |
Sun Jun 17, 2012 3:13 am |
Re: Verification search |
Don Dailey |
Sun Jun 17, 2012 3:41 am |
Re: Verification search |
Miguel A. Ballicora |
Sun Jun 17, 2012 4:21 am |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|