Author: Chris Whittington
Date: 14:53:55 12/26/97
Go up one level in this thread
On December 26, 1997 at 11:25:11, Tord Romstad wrote: >On December 26, 1997 at 02:40:01, Christophe Theron wrote: >> >>I gave up using these "threat evasion extensions", because I don't use a >>SEE any more, and it was not clear that it strengthened my program. >>Surprisingly, the improvement, if any, was a positional one. Not >>tactical. >> >>Jean Christophe Weill describes some threats extensions (entropic >>extensions) for the old Joker program in his PHD thesis (in french...). >>He also gave up using them. >> > >I believe that M-Chess uses lots of threat extensions. The program >sometimes >produces very long main lines with few captures and checks, even at low >search >depths. > >Tord True. But if you play out the main lines, you'll see that at a critical point, Mchess will show a deep opponent move and continuatiion. This move will be 'bad' for the opponent, whilst being plausible. The opponent will have had a better move, enough to refute the line.Often the 'better' move will be seemingly obvious for a plausible move generator, except that Mchess didn't create it, didn't look at it. So at depth, Mhess is dangerously extending and/or pruning. My guess is that the pruning is by 'explosion' count, ie the search is opening too wide, so it gets pruned without looking at all possibilities - dangerous, but often speculatively interesting. Chris Whittington
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.