Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

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

Author: Peter McKenzie

Date: 21:43:23 05/14/00

Go up one level in this thread


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

>Tinker's q-search lazy eval (material - max_pos_score)> beta return (like
>standing pat?), and (material + queen+pawn) <= alpha return (quasi-futility?)
>was working fairly well, until a K vs KBN endgame.  Since it was not getting to
>the eval function, the special mating code was never used and Tinker ended up
>with a 50 move draw...Now I check for opponent's pieces <= one minor and skip.
>
>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?

I use normal futility pruning, I think its pretty much a no-brainer although
there are a few traps as you have discovered :-)

I also use extended futility pruning, which is a little risky (but only a
little) so not to everyone's taste.  It is a definite win for my program though.

I don't use any form of razoring, it just didn't appeal to me :-)

I also have my own pruning scheme that extends Ernt's ideas somewhat, this is
still under development.

cheers,
Peter



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.