Re: [Bug-gnubg] Wildly different evaluations by CRASHED network

[Joseph Heled]

Joern Thyssen wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> On Sat, Jul 06, 2002 at 12:49:58PM +1200, Joseph Heled wrote
> >
> >
> > I am fully aware of the deficiencies of the "crashed" net. Still, I
> > think it is an improvement over the previous state. Not only does the
> > crashed net understand "it's" positions better, the generic contact
> > net is not burdened by understanding them.
> 
> What about adding a second or a series of crashed net(s) for handling
> crashed positions with different number of chequers borne off?
> 

One can have up to 225 (15x15) nets (both for contact and crashed), so the
question is (as always) the price/benefit ratio. I would wait and start "small",
say with a better crashed net. (this "small" is quite huge in my standards).
Also, there is a hope you can get most of this improvement by adding better
inputs to one net. Perhaps as time goes by and cycles get shorter, we can move
to bigger nets when they are proved better.
 
> 
> I can offer around 2000 bogomips -- but I'm not sure an intel-bogomip is
> worth the same as a sun-bogomip :-) Meaning, sun probably does floating
> point operations faster than intel.
 
Thanks, Joern!!

Mine are Intel as well. Anyone else out there? I think we need more to make this
a reality ...

-Joseph