Computer Chess Club Archives

Search

Messages

Subject: Re: Caution K v KBN and lazy eval or futility

Author: Jon Dart

Date: 19:47:34 05/14/00

Go up one level in this thread

On May 14, 2000 at 16:53:46, Brian Richardson wrote:

>This was discussed in ICCA Vol 21 # 2 (Extended Futility and Dark Thought).  I
>also have tried various regular futility, extended futility and razoring (as
>outlined in the ICCA article), but they did not seem to help, at least given
>Tinker's mix of searching algorithims.
>
>Anyone else getting "good" results with them?

Arasan has used razoring for the past couple of versions. It is helpful
but the improvement over no razoring is not dramatic.

I looked at Heinz's book but I didn't find his pseudocode (Figure 3.1)
immediately useful, because it assumes that search() starts with making
a move, while most people's search() routine will start with move
generation and will then search the generated moves.

Sjeng (amateur program) apparently uses extended futility pruning.
The source is available, but I've only glanced at it so far.

--Jon

• Re: Caution K v KBN and lazy eval or futility Andrew Williams 09:03:30 05/15/00
  • Re: Caution K v KBN and lazy eval or futility Peter McKenzie 13:39:13 05/15/00
    • Re: Caution K v KBN and lazy eval or futility Andrew Williams 14:56:48 05/15/00
      • Re: Caution K v KBN and lazy eval or futility Peter McKenzie 15:46:29 05/15/00
        • Re: Caution K v KBN and lazy eval or futility Andrew Williams 01:18:23 05/16/00
• Re: Caution K v KBN and lazy eval or futility Ernst A. Heinz 07:28:58 05/15/00
  • Re: Caution K v KBN and lazy eval or futility Jon Dart 12:18:25 05/15/00

This page took 0.02 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.