Author: Dave Gomboc
Date: 09:09:59 08/17/00
Go up one level in this thread
On August 17, 2000 at 07:17:12, Tony Werten wrote:
>On August 17, 2000 at 01:06:11, Peter Kappler wrote:
>
>>On August 16, 2000 at 23:09:02, Christophe Theron wrote:
>>
>>>On August 16, 2000 at 19:47:27, Dan Andersson wrote:
>>>
>>>>On August 16, 2000 at 19:34:21, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On August 16, 2000 at 18:52:03, David Rasmussen wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>My Qsearch usually takes up 70-80 % of the nodes searched.
>>>>>>What are the, say, 10 best ideas/techniques to cut this number down?
>>>>>
>>>>>a) don't qsearch
>>>>>
>>>>>b) use futility pruning
>>>>>
>>>>>c) use SEE futility pruning
>>>>>
>>>>>d) live with it...qsearch % tends to be high in every chessprogram
>>>>>
>>>>>>P.S. I am writing a new chess program from scratch and I'm very much in love
>>>>>>with the scientific beauty of MTD(f). What are the pratical pros and cons of
>>>>>>doing MTD(f). What are the pitfalls etc. ?
>>>>>
>>>>>It causes trouble with search trics that depend on alpha/beta values.
>>>>But introduces new tricks. Especially if one uses ETC.
>>>
>>>
>>>Sorry to ask (actually you certainly expect someone will ask), but
>>>
>>>What is ETC?
>>>
>>>
>>> Christophe
>>>
>>
>>
>>Enhanced Transposition Cutoffs.
>>
>>If the current position isn't in the hashtable, you try each legal move in the
>>hope that one of them will produce a hash hit with a score that can cause a
>>cutoff.
>>
>>I think Schaeffer(?) wrote a paper on this...
>
>It was Aske Plaat in his PhD thesis " Research, Re:search and Re-search "
>( which is mostly about MTD )
>
>Tony
It's there too, but there was a paper published by Schaeffer and Plaat on it
earlier, which can be found in the 1994-1996 time range at
http://www.cs.ualberta.ca/~jonathan/Papers/ai.html
Dave
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.