Author: Peter McKenzie
Date: 14:38:28 03/30/00
Go up one level in this thread
On March 30, 2000 at 15:47:03, Inmann Werner wrote: >On March 30, 2000 at 15:39:09, Peter Fendrich wrote: > >>On March 30, 2000 at 15:04:09, Inmann Werner wrote: >> >>>On March 30, 2000 at 11:07:16, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>> >>>>Here is mine: >>>> >>>>1. hash table move. >>>>2. captures that don't appear to lose material using a SEE procdedure, >>>>ordered from biggest gain to equal exchanges. >>>>3. 2 killer moves. >>>>4. up to 4 history ordered moves (history heuristic) >>>>5. rest of the moves. >>> >>>question to 5) >>>here is the rest of the non capturing moves and the "loosing capture" moves. >>>Which of them should be searched first? >>> >>>IMHO the non capturing moves. >>> >>>Werner >> >>I don't think you should order them at all... >>When the program reaches this point it will probably not find a fail high for >>the current node and the sorting will only cost performance without giving much >>in return. >>//Peter > >Excuse, but I do not agree. >Why should a good positional move not produce a fail high? >And i do not sort. I only give the moves "values" at generation time. In search, >I only look at the first 9 moves in an ordered way, the rest i pick at random. >My question is: When I produce the "loosing captures" (together with all >captures), I can give them a small positive or a negative value (without cost). > >I give them a negative value, and it works a little better than otherwise. Yes, I found similar. I have some crude logic to give obvious losing captures a negative value so they will PROBABLY be searched after non-captures. It seems to help a little. I say probably, because like you I only grab the top N moves in order of move ordering score. The rest of the moves are taken as they come. This gives me a new idea: after the first N moves have been searched, maybe it would be worthwhile doing a scan through the rest of the moves and putting all moves with a negative score at the end of the list? Something else to add to my ideas list... > >Werner
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.