Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Futility Pruning

Author: Uri Blass

Date: 09:02:23 12/20/02

Go up one level in this thread


On December 20, 2002 at 11:26:28, Richard Pijl wrote:

>On December 20, 2002 at 10:54:01, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>
>>On December 20, 2002 at 08:23:59, Russell Reagan wrote:
>>
>>No futility is 100% different from lazy evaluation.
>>
>>Futility in fact selects less moves (in qsearch)
>>based upon alfa or beta and lazy evaluation gives
>>back a quick score a lot of the times.
>
>They are still related in a sense that both 'cut-off' the work to be done by
>saying that it can't get good enough to improve alpha, so better stop working on
>it.
>>
>>If you search a ply deeper a futile pruned move should not
>>get pruned, whereas a lazy evaluated position will give problems
>>no matter what depth you search.
>>
>>In contradiction to draughts where everything is seen fullwidth,
>>in computerchess the effect of futility can be very bad too,
>>because last 3 to 4 plies (R=2 versus R=3) the qsearch is returning
>>back a score instead of a full search.
>>
>>If that misses major problems then you are in trouble.
>>
>>The argumentation of Heinz that futility is correct, is using the
>>assumption that an evaluation doesn't get a big score for positional
>>matters. The problem is that todays top programs do give big scores
>>though.
>
>Although Baron is not a top program yet I'm starting to feel this.
>To be sure that the wrong nodes aren't getting pruned I wrote a little piece of
>test code. It returned the highest difference it found between the lazyeval
>score and the full eval score (but not with passers on the board, and not in the
>endgame). I added 20% to this and that was the threshold used for both lazyeval
>and futility pruning. It turned out that with every release of the Baron this
>value increased.
>Now I'm working on 0.99.4 and the margin was getting very large, more than 5
>pawns.

I think that it may be interesting to see the position that you talk about

When do you see a difference of more than 4 pawns between the static evaluation
and the lazy evaluation?

I can imagine positions when the positional score is more than 4 pawns but I
think that in these positions there are easy ways to detect a suspect that
something is wrong also in a fast evaluation.

Uri



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.