Author: Bruce Moreland
Date: 23:38:52 09/16/98
Go up one level in this thread
On September 16, 1998 at 12:09:31, blass uri wrote: >I believe a slow searcher can be better because you must have a slow searcher to >evaluate which lines are more important to analyze. > >I think that a slow searcher can be better also in test positions than fast >searcher because of this reason. I think that it is interesting that if you ask people why a slow searcher is slow, and a fast searcher is fast (by "slow" and "fast" I mean programs with low and high nodes per second), they will assume that the slow one is slow because it has a complex evaluation function. This doesn't have to be the case. You can invest time in places other than the evaluation function. You can have functions that try to determine when you should extend or prune a line, for instance. Some of this doesn't even have to involve any knowledge, really. bruce
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.