Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 20:09:21 04/04/00
Go up one level in this thread
On April 04, 2000 at 07:50:18, Jan Pernicka wrote: >On April 03, 2000 at 15:35:57, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>>> >>>> Excuse me, could someone explain to me in several sentences what is >>>> SEE function good for? Thanks >>>> Jan >>> > >>What it does is ask the following question: >> >>If I capture the piece on square X, what will I gain (or lose) in terms of >>material. You just enumerate the white and black pieces that attack square >>X, and then do the exchanges to see if it is good or bad to do. Just like a >>human asks "Can I move my knight to e5?" by noticing the pieces for both sides >>that are currently attacking e5... > > So, what's the difference between SEE and quiescence search (when you > take into account only capturing moves "on 1 square")? > I think, they could be implemented in very similar way... > > Thanks, > > Jan if you limited the q-search to the single square, you would (a) supposedly get the same score as the SEE code, but (b) much slower, as the SEE is not doing any sort of move generation, recursive search stuff, etc. Way faster... And (IMHO of course) it would be prone to serious errors. I once did this in a 1970-72 version of 'blitz' but when I went from selective to full-width, I started doing a traditional capture search which is more comprehensive in detecting overloaded pieces, multiple hung pieces on different squares, etc..
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.