In Andscacs was like 10-12 elo, when it had more like 3200 ccrl (4 cpu). But probably is not very optimized. I have not played much with the various parameters of it. I have just compared the code on Andscacs with the Texel code and is conceptually very similar. And I think I found something to improve already, as is doing singular extension even when has extended by a capture, so thanks for commenting!petero2 wrote: In that list my guess is that singular extensions gives the largest gain. In texel SE was worth around 25 elo. This assumes you use the modern version of singular extensions though (called restricted SE in the CPW), not the historic ChipTest/Deep Thought version which seems to have a too large overhead to be effective.
do modern programs play 22.Nxf7 in this position...
Moderators: hgm, Rebel, chrisw
-
- Posts: 2204
- Joined: Sat Jan 18, 2014 10:24 am
- Location: Andorra
Re: do modern programs play 22.Nxf7 in this position...
Daniel José - http://www.andscacs.com
-
- Posts: 2204
- Joined: Sat Jan 18, 2014 10:24 am
- Location: Andorra
Re: do modern programs play 22.Nxf7 in this position...
Also I think an aggressive futility pruning is worth more than 25 elo in long time control games.
Daniel José - http://www.andscacs.com