Author: Ed Schröder
Date: 21:52:55 03/30/00
Go up one level in this thread
On March 31, 2000 at 00:25:23, James Robertson wrote: >On March 30, 2000 at 18:32:40, Robert Hyatt 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 >> >> >>In my case, losing captures come first, but only because that is the way they >>appear in the list. IE I generate captures, sift the good ones to the top, and >>leave the lemons at the bottom. Later I generate the rest of the moves and add >>to the list, which places them after the lemons... > >Have you tested to see if the move ordering could be improved? In my case I >search: >Hash move >Winning captures Third in Rebel is Queen promotions. >Equal captures Remaining promotions. Ed >2 Killer Moves >Noncaptures ordered by the history table >All captures (even the ones we already searched) ordered by the history table > >James
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.