Author: Severi Salminen
Date: 14:17:31 01/27/01
Go up one level in this thread
>Just a quick test. Two runs on WAC 5 sec/problem: > > - SEE pruning in Quiescent Search: 270 > - without it: 246 > >So it is definitely a win for my program (Pepito). I have not yet tested my prog on suites, so hard to say. Could you play a few games between those versions to see how SEE affects strenght in "real life". >If I can get a cut with pos_eval + mat_gain I give up this capture. Another >question is if SEE is profitable in normal search. I also it there but kicking >it out would be a bit more difficult so I haven't tried yet :-). At the same >time captures are generated I assign them their MVV/LVA scores. Then I try >captures with positive scores and when this gets below zero I call SEE for >remaining moves. Losing ones are searched after all non captures. I'm doing this already and a little more. I generate all captures and assign a SEE score for all of them - except for moves where a piece or pawn is capturing a piece with higher value (PxN, NxR, RxQ...), in these cases I assign captured_piece_value-capturing_piece_value. Then I sort them and try all moves whose material(node)+see_score(move)+MARGIN>alpha and see_score(move)>=0. As my moves are sorted I can quit when the first move fails one of above criterias. I am very disappointed because the SEE version doesn't show tactical superiority to SEEless version. I have to make further testings. Severi
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.