Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Pawn hashing without Zobrist keys

Author: Gerd Isenberg

Date: 14:02:04 09/12/03

Go up one level in this thread


On September 12, 2003 at 16:53:44, Omid David Tabibi wrote:

>On September 12, 2003 at 16:49:09, Gerd Isenberg wrote:
>
>>On September 12, 2003 at 16:39:33, Omid David Tabibi wrote:
>>
>>>On September 12, 2003 at 16:34:48, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote:
>>>
>>>>On September 12, 2003 at 16:33:13, Omid David Tabibi wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>I still don't understand why modulus is needed, and
>>>>>I have a pawn hash of 2^17 entries. What is so special
>>>>>about pawn hash that you need the modulus operation
>>>>>there while you don't need it in the normal hash table?
>>>>
>>>>You don't?
>>>>
>>>>I assume you have 32 or 64 bit hash keys.
>>>
>>>64 bit.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>How do you map 2^64 -> 2^17 ?
>>>
>>>Please, don't tell me that you guys are mapping the hash key as following:
>>>
>>>address = key % table_size;
>>
>>
>>Yes, unless you use zobrist keys and power of two table sizes for pawn hashing,
>>which is probably smarter. Do you have a smarter way of getting a hashkey from
>>white/black pawn bitboards?
>>
>>>
>>>???
>>>
>>>Do you know how many cycles does the modolus operation take???
>>>
>>
>>Yes, that's the reason for my initial posting.
>>
>
>assuming 'table_size' is a power of 2, the following two expressions are
>equivalent:
>
>address = key % table_size;
>address = key & (table_size - 1);
>


Yes, but if "key" is whitePawns-blackPawns, bitboards as 64-bit ints, you may
loose some pawns. That's the advantage with zobrist keys. I guess a 32-bit key,
incremental updated if pawn structure changed, is good enough to address the
pawn hash table.

Gerd


>
>
>>Gerd
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>--
>>>>GCP



This page took 0.01 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.