Author: Peter Fendrich
Date: 09:02:52 09/06/01
Go up one level in this thread
On September 06, 2001 at 10:21:40, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On September 06, 2001 at 06:12:16, Odd Gunnar Malin wrote: > >>> >>I was pondering with this strange results from Tiger and Wilhelm and (and my >>engine :) ). >> >>There is other possibilities for long search time (many nodes) before the score >>change. If you don't save hash when depth=0, eg. after returning from qsearch >>you get such results ( I don't save hash in qsearch). >> >>From my engine: (score change from 140 to 226) >>hash save when depth=0 -> 430k nodes >>no hashing when depth=0 -> 8731k nodes >> >>Odd Gunnar Malin > > >I don't hash in the q-search either. However, fine70 runs better with poor >move ordering, due to hash grafting. If you search the best move first at >every node, this takes 26 plies to solve, IIRC. If your move ordering is >less than optimal, you require fewer plies to find the correct move (Kb1). > >At ply 26, you should see winning another pawn, for a score of +2 plus whatever >positional edge you assign for creating a passed pawn. In a few more plies >the score should jump yet again... and again... At ply 25, mine (Terra) jumps up to +3,4. Does that mean less optimal move ordering? How do you know? Couldn't it be at some point better move ordering? //Peter
This page took 0.02 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.