Computer Chess Club Archives

Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Search algorithms and effeciency

Author: James Swafford

Date: 13:04:18 05/30/01

On May 30, 2001 at 11:21:41, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:

[snip]

>
>Good examples of successive algorithms are on the one hand
>  - MTD, if a program has a very conservative evaluation function
>         and a pawn is worth not so much

What makes you say that?  The evaluation needs some consistency,
avoiding wild fluctuations, but what's with the "pawn is worth not
so much" comment?

--
James


>
>  - PVS (sometimes also used in combination with a root window)
>
>Very popular nowadays is nullmove using R=3 and near the leaves R=2,
>whereas in past R=2 was very popular.
>
>Best regards,
>Vincent

Re: Search algorithms and effeciency Vincent Diepeveen 14:10:25 05/30/01
- Re: Search algorithms and effeciency James Swafford 18:28:34 05/30/01
- Re: Search algorithms and effeciency Dan Andersson 14:22:10 05/30/01
  - Re: Search algorithms and effeciency Vincent Diepeveen 02:50:19 05/31/01
    - Re: Search algorithms and effeciency Dan Andersson 05:11:16 05/31/01
      - Re: Search algorithms and effeciency Vincent Diepeveen 09:26:19 05/31/01
        
        Re: Search algorithms and effeciency Rudolf Huber 09:47:34 05/31/01
        
        Re: Search algorithms and effeciency David Rasmussen 12:35:01 05/31/01
        
        Re: Search algorithms and effeciency Dan Andersson 13:45:17 05/31/01
        
        Re: Search algorithms and effeciency Rudolf Huber 22:31:26 05/31/01
        
        Re: Search algorithms and effeciency Dan Andersson 13:45:04 05/31/01
    - Re: Search algorithms and effeciency Vincent Diepeveen 02:51:26 05/31/01
Re: Search algorithms and effeciency Dan Andersson 13:41:39 05/30/01
- Re: Search algorithms and effeciency Andrew Williams 15:05:49 05/30/01

This page took 0.01 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.