Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 18:56:33 01/26/01
Go up one level in this thread
On January 26, 2001 at 12:03:28, Miguel A. Ballicora wrote: >On January 26, 2001 at 09:38:16, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>>>So the question is, what sort of moves could be candidates for a negative >>>>extension? >>> >>>Some underpromotions. >>> >>>Greetings, >>>Steffen. >> >> >>captures that SEE say lose massive material > >Would not this discourage to make sacrifices? Maybe it will be useful combined >with an agressive "positive" extension policy so lines that are losing >material but are interesting are extended later to compensate this initial >negative extension. Sounds crazy? > This definitely might make sacrifices harder to find. But so does null-move already... as well as other selective algorithms... >>last few moves at a ply when the score has not changed from alpha for all the >>others. > >Sounds very interesting... it will be corrected at the next ply if it is wrong. >With a very good move ordering this could be a winner! > >>Move that the hash table says would fail low if the hash table entry had enough >>draft to make this happen. > >I don't understand. Doesn't fail low automatically if draft>depth? I meant the case where draft < depth, which would mean a shallower search would fail low, but we can't here. > >>moves that return a piece to the square it sat on 2 plies ago. > >As long as it is not check? that will avoid missing some perpetual checks. >Wont'it? >In fact, I am "positively" extending here! > >Regards, >Miguel > >> >>lots of things to try. Whether they would work or not is another thing, >>of course. :)
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.