Author: Russell Reagan
Date: 08:19:24 01/30/03
Go up one level in this thread
On January 30, 2003 at 09:42:01, Andrew Williams wrote: >To illustrate why SEE is better than MVV/LVA, suppose you have a position where >White attacks two of black's minor pieces (worth 300 points each). In each case, >White has one attacker on the piece. One of these pieces is attacked by a Rook >and is not defended. The other is attacked by a Pawn but is defended. SEE will >tell you that the rook capture is better, because it will calculate a material >gain of 300 points versus a material gain of 200 points. MVV/LVA will tell you >that the Pawn capture is better, because the score will be (300-1) versus >(300-5) for the Rook capture. The difference is that if the rook capture would >give you a beta cutoff and the pawn capture wouldn't, you'll do a lot of >unnecessary work by searching them in the wrong order Thanks for your comments, and I have a question. Are both SEE and MVV/LVA only concerned with captures on a single square? I have always thought of MVV/LVA to be a kind of qsearch. I think some people have different definitions of what SEE is. For instance, I recall Vincent saying that you can just call SEE() + Eval() straigth from your search function instead of calling QSearch(), so he obviously sees it as a whole board thing instead of something on a single square. I have always thought it was a whole board thing also, but I have never implemented it.
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.