Author: Brian Richardson
Date: 07:34:06 05/26/00
Go up one level in this thread
On May 26, 2000 at 09:21:01, José Carlos wrote: > I'm curious about what search algorithms and heuristics do commercial and >amateur programs use, for example, null move vs no null move, PVS vs MTD(f) and >so on. > In Averno, I use PVS and AS, and haven't tried null move cause I'm a little >afraid of losing precision in short tactics, though I see most programs use null >move. > Junior is said not use null move. Do any other of you guys or commecial >programmers not use null move? If so, what are your reasons? > Who of you have tried MTD(f)? Why did you keep/discard it? > What other algorithms/heuristics are you using or did you discard? > > Thanks in advance. > > José C. Tinker uses PVS and single-level hashtable (for positions, but not pawns--yet), used in both full-width and q-search. Then extensions and lazy eval, then null moves (variable based on depth and pieces left), then killers, then hash move (if any), then generates moves. Next internal iterative deepening (when out of PV), then PVS (full windwow first move then small window with re-search on failures), plus futility. Whew. The order of these is VERY important (e.g. hash tables before in-check test), at least for Tinker. Also, each one gets tweaked. Each program will become unique and changes in one area often impact another area and overall results. Am now working on faster automated testing process to handle incremental improvements. Brian
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.