Author: Omid David Tabibi
Date: 09:05:39 03/09/03
Go up one level in this thread
On March 08, 2003 at 12:05:59, Russell Reagan wrote: >On March 08, 2003 at 09:41:18, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>Sure you can. You can evaluate all the pawn-only stuff, and then you can >>pre-cmpute whatever you need such as passed pawn locations, weak pawn locations, >>weak square locations, open file locations, half-open-file locations, and so >>forth. You stuff that in the pawn hash table, and then use it when you evaluate >>pieces to get the "coordination". > >I wonder if it would be faster (or reasonable) to keep track of this stuff >incrementally. For example, from the starting position, you know that if a pawn >makes a capture, or is captured, then that file is half open. So you can keep >track of how many captures have been made to or from a file, and keep track of >isolated pawns that way. I guess using a pawn hash would still be faster or more >generally useful, and as with all things incrementally updated, you do some >wasted updating computations where you may not use it. In the latest Genesis I'm updating some of these pawn formation data incrementally. It does produce some speedup but that's not significant.
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.