Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Aspiration Window sizes

Author: Mike Byrne

Date: 08:09:23 03/14/05

Go up one level in this thread


On March 14, 2005 at 10:05:24, Robert Hyatt wrote:

>On March 14, 2005 at 09:32:55, Renze Steenhuisen wrote:
>
>>Hi all,
>>
>>can anyone tell me whether there has ever been a study on the actual needed
>>aspiration window sizes? The only thing I am only reading is that "it is common
>>knowledge" and "it is known" concerning Aspiration Windows. And Crafty is using
>>0.40*PAWN_VALUE because it seemed to perform best. But is there actual data
>>somewhere?
>>
>>Cheers!
>>
>>Renze
>
>
>That is "actual data".  Take your program, and try different values, over a
>large test set of positions.  Find the range that produces the greatest average
>search depth for the test set.  It will vary for each program, since the
>evaluation functions can produce wildly variable scores...

Not only is very program different , but even different versions of the smae
program.   When a program has a solid a evalualtion, I think you can make it
tighter -- I have often used .35 with different versions of Crafty. In fact I
think that may have been the Crafty standard earlier).

Also if you tone down the positional points available, you can also tighten up
the window.

To answe your question, I don;t beleive there is published data, but I suspect
some of the professional programmers have their own data and for obvious reason
are not in a position to share.




This page took 0 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.