Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 13:36:30 06/04/02
Go up one level in this thread
On June 04, 2002 at 16:22:17, Robert Henry Durrett wrote: >On June 04, 2002 at 16:20:05, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>On June 04, 2002 at 16:14:07, Robert Henry Durrett wrote: >>[snip] >>>I was thinking about the use [somehow] of chess knowledge to evaluate the root >>>node, but without using any search to accomplish this evaluation. >> >>If you have no search at all, this approach will fail. Guaranteed. >> >>>This appears >>>to have been incorrect. It now looks like you are still relying on examination >>>of possible lines emminating from the position, in addition to anything else you >>>may be doing, to evaluate the root node BEFORE selecting the "children." >>> >>>Is this closer to the truth? >> >>Here is what happens: >> >>The root node's children get examined. The very best looking one becomes the pm >>(predicted move) which is the first thing in the pv. That node gets examined >>very carefully. All the other nodes get a "zero window search" (which is >>actually one unit wide). These searches happen very quickly most of the time. >>If your evaluation is pretty good, the pm guess will usually be right (90% or >>better). Some of the worst moves will get the fat trimmed off with null-move >>pruning. They won't be searched as deeply. You don't have any choice about >>selecting the children. The children are each and every legal move from each >>and every node in the tree. They don't all get searched at the same depth. >>Extensions will lengthen some paths and pruning will shorten some others. >> >>Have you seen Bruce Morland's or Colin Frayn's tutorials? They are very good at >>explaining how computer chess searching works. > >No, but it sounds like I really need them! Where to find? Bruce: http://www.seanet.com/~brucemo/topics/topics.htm Colin: http://www.ast.cam.ac.uk/~cmf/chess/theory.html
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.