Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 13:17:10 09/06/02
Go up one level in this thread
On September 06, 2002 at 16:03:42, Sune Fischer wrote: >On September 06, 2002 at 15:46:53, Tony Werten wrote: > >>On September 06, 2002 at 14:45:11, Dann Corbit wrote: >> >>>Did anyone notice his cutoff idea in the evaluation function? >>> >>>It seems to me to be a very good idea, and I don't know if others have tried it >>>out. >>> >>>Basically, it consists of three modes with two early exits... >>> >>>1. If the material + structure score alone is dominant enough, it exits right >>>away. >>>2. Otherwise, it processes the piece list. If that score is dominant, it exits. >>>3. Otherwise, it does a full board control scan for all 64 squares. >>> >>>It is described starting on page 62 under the section "3.3.2 Multi Staged >>>Design" >>>He gets roughly 71% evals returning in stage #1, 13% in stage #2 and 7% in stage >>>#3. >>> >>>It seems like it might be a big win to do it that way. >> >>It's called lazy eval and is not a good idea. The times it is wrong happen to be >>the important ones. > >I think you can do it safely. >If your positional score can't get higher than x, and your material score is >already larger than beta+x, then what do you win by doing a full eval? > >This is how I use it now, of course I have simple eval, but even with a >complicated one I would sum up the (few) big factors first and try the same. > >-S. > > > >>Tony I do it in stages. Material + big window. material + big score stuff + smaller window. Finally do entire eval. The last part of the eval, the individual piece stuff, is really a number cruncher and even if I have to do the big score stuff like passed pawns, I can generally avoid going thru all the piece loops doing that stuff...
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.