Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: regular hash key & pawn hash key together--good idea?

Author: Bas Hamstra

Date: 09:10:29 09/16/99

Go up one level in this thread


I don't agree. I store 32 bits, but use the Index as to store 48 or more bits
*effectively*. I store a hashmove for extra checking. If the hashmove is not
legal it prints a message. I never see such messages.

Regards,
Bas Hamstra.

On September 16, 1999 at 09:44:56, Robert Hyatt wrote:

>On September 16, 1999 at 04:00:43, Tom Kerrigan wrote:
>
>>If you have a program with 64 bit hash keys, is it a good idea to devote n bits
>>to pawns and the rest to pieces and side-to-move?
>>
>>I was thinking a good balance may be 24 bits for pawns, but I have no data to
>>back this up. Does anybody else?
>>
>>-Tom
>
>If you are going to use them independently to probe tables (ie using the 24
>bits to probe the pawn hash table) then this won't work well.  24 bits is only
>16 million possibilities...  that will get more than a few collisions.  And
>the same for the upper 40 bits and pieces.  I know that 32 bits is not enough
>for normal hashing.  Stanback/I ran a bunch of tests years ago in a discussion
>on r.g.c.c and we got collisions by the bucketload with 32 bit keys.  64 was
>totally safe back then, although speeds are way up now compared to then.  I
>am using a 32 bit pawn hash signature, but a full 64 bit total hash signature.



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.