I'm evaluating a change in the my implementation of aspiration windows widening. (https://bitbucket.org/brtzsnr/zurichess ... aspiration)
So far, after 18500 games with TC 40/15s+0.05s I see no improvement.
W:5350 L:5373 D:7777 T:18500
LOS:0.4121 ELO:-0.43±3.68
Is this time control good enough for testing changes to aspiration window algorithm?
Evaluating aspiration window algorithm changes
Moderators: hgm, Rebel, chrisw
-
- Posts: 433
- Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2015 4:02 pm
-
- Posts: 27808
- Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 10:06 am
- Location: Amsterdam
- Full name: H G Muller
Re: Evaluating aspiration window algorithm changes
I think it is pointless to use games to evaluate such a change, Measuring time to depth of a few hundred representative positions should be good enough.
-
- Posts: 433
- Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2015 4:02 pm
Re: Evaluating aspiration window algorithm changes
I haven't had much success with using test positions to reduce search tree.
What I tried was to improve the move ordering. I took silent_but_deadly tests and ran a GA to optimize the mvvlva table I use in zurichess. In theory the GA managed to decrease the number of searched nodes by ~20%. However, overall the engine had a 25-35 ELO regression.
What I tried was to improve the move ordering. I took silent_but_deadly tests and ran a GA to optimize the mvvlva table I use in zurichess. In theory the GA managed to decrease the number of searched nodes by ~20%. However, overall the engine had a 25-35 ELO regression.
Last edited by brtzsnr on Tue Jan 27, 2015 5:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 27808
- Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 10:06 am
- Location: Amsterdam
- Full name: H G Muller
Re: Evaluating aspiration window algorithm changes
What are 'silent_but_deadly tests'?
-
- Posts: 433
- Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2015 4:02 pm
Re: Evaluating aspiration window algorithm changes
The tests can be found here https://chessprogramming.wikispaces.com ... but+deadly and were originally published on this forum http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopi ... 3fc0f9cb4b.
-
- Posts: 175
- Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2010 9:47 pm
- Location: Austria
Re: Evaluating aspiration window algorithm changes
But those are only 130-140 positions, is it not much too less for optimising on them?brtzsnr wrote:The tests can be found here https://chessprogramming.wikispaces.com ... but+deadly and were originally published on this forum http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopi ... 3fc0f9cb4b.
-
- Posts: 27808
- Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 10:06 am
- Location: Amsterdam
- Full name: H G Muller
Re: Evaluating aspiration window algorithm changes
It seems that these are positions with a specific 'solution'. That is not representative of game positions, so you would expect tuning on them to lose Elo.