Reckless search depth

[Jouni]

Yes I know depth is useless, you cannot compare different engines depts etc! But I noticed, that Reckless has generally 5 plies less than Plenty and SF. Also in opening with 1 core.

Code: Select all

Analysis by PlentyChess 7.0.37:
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.Qc2 0-0 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.Qxc3 d5 7.e3 c5 8.dxc5 Ne4 9.Qc2 a5 10.cxd5 exd5 11.Bd3 
  =  (0.07)   Depth: 47/65   00:09:01  346mN
  
Analysis by Stockfish 18:
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.d3 Bc5 5.0-0 0-0 6.c3 d6 7.h3 a5 8.Re1 h6 9.Nbd2 Be6 10.Bb5 Qb8 11.Bxc6 bxc6
  =  (0.22)   Depth: 46/68   00:08:49  324mN
  
Analysis by Reckless 0.9.0:
1.c4 
  =  (0.21 --)   Depth: 41/63   00:09:42  368mN

Maybe this is proof, that Reckless is less selective and for this reason solves test positions better than others?

[Jouni]

In TCEC (512 threads) Stockfish depth is average 30 higher. And nodespeed double.

[Stephen Ham]

Hi Jouni,

I assume that SF's greater ply depth is largely a result of radical pruning. In short, fewer positions per ply were examined. Do you concur?

All the best,
-Steve-

[Dann Corbit]

Rust and C++ are very close in speed of execution, which makes the nodes per second metric interesting.

Without a doubt, the search of Reckless is broader than the search of Stockfish. Meaning, as you say, more nodes per ply.