Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 19:32:29 01/18/03
Go up one level in this thread
On January 18, 2003 at 20:40:25, Dave Gomboc wrote: >On January 17, 2003 at 17:27:22, Dieter Buerssner wrote: > >>On January 17, 2003 at 17:08:11, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>Remember that the mate scores in the search are "mate in N from the _root_ >>>position." When you store a mate score in the transposition table, you have to >>>correct it so that it is "mate in N from the current ply". Once you do that, >>>you >>>can use the scores easily as when you get an EXACT mate score from the table, >>>you know it is mate in N from the current ply, so obviously it is mate in N+ >>>something from the root position. Adjust it correctly and you are done. >> >>I agree - of course. >> >>>You can see how I do this in crafty if you look at hash.c... >> >>Last time I looked, you were just throwing valuable information in this regard >>away. Crafty didn't store mate bounds due to the method you explained above, but >>rather stored all mate bounds as some "Mate in very many moves". I am convinced, >>that the adjustment to a mate score from root cannot be worse, and often will >>ahve advantages (more cutoffs, faster search, ...). >> >>Regards, >>Dieter > >I thought Bruce Moreland recommended this once, for non-PV cases where the root >score is much less than mating (the idea being that since the line is just going >to get cutoff anyway, why do the adjustment work for nothing?) > >Dave I'm doing this once again. The point is that it can make the tree smaller if you are searching thru a forest of varying depth mates...
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.