Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 17:44:45 04/24/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 24, 2001 at 15:19:42, Bas Hamstra wrote: >On April 23, 2001 at 23:19:39, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On April 23, 2001 at 11:33:52, Bas Hamstra wrote: >> >>>On April 23, 2001 at 11:03:32, Ulrich Tuerke wrote: >>> >>>It is easy to check out where it goes wrong, by comparing the values with and >>>without FP. Values are in my case mostly different when the capture is checking. >>>Also in the endgame it is risky, when for instance a pawncapture brings the king >>>out of the "square of the pawn". >>> >>>In my case it does not matter much, because you will get a cut anyway the next >>>ply. It saves a call to ab/evaluate, that's about it. I can't see how that gives >>>enourmous gains. And it doesn't in my case. >>> >>> >>>Bas. >> >>What it does is cut the total q-search nodes by 1/2 at least. That is a pretty >>significant savings... > >Not in my case, no. Skipping SEE losing captures cuts 50%. Then, if I want >reasonably accurate scores, futility cuts another 15% or so. However I do not >consider any checking capture as futile. I don't follow. Skipping SEE losing captures cuts 50% is what you said? That is what I said.. the q-search gets 50% _smaller_.. ?? Bob
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.