Author: Anthony Cozzie
Date: 05:44:39 06/03/04
Go up one level in this thread
On June 03, 2004 at 07:49:10, Daniel Shawul wrote: >On June 03, 2004 at 07:37:30, Anthony Cozzie wrote: > >>On June 03, 2004 at 03:21:07, Daniel Shawul wrote: >> >>>Hi >>> >>>I used to use adaptive null move pruning. >>>But now since i added checks only in the first ply of quiescence search(horizon) >>>I think it is time to use R=3 everywhere. Is it safe? >>>Do i need to do other safe guard searches like verified null move >>>pruning? >>> >>>best >>>daniel >> >>I use R=3 everywhere (checks in q-search). It is not a pure win though: you see >>more in some areas and less in others. >> >>anthony > >do you do checks everywhere? Zappa is so fast so i don't think you do it. >I tried adaptive null move pruning and pure R=3 in test suites and not much >difference. Besides since R=3 for depth > 6 or 8 and it doesn't take much to >reach those depths, i see no difference b/n those methods. > >daniel I tried doing checks everywhere in q-search ala Diep. Try it yourself :) I was literally getting 50-ply deep q-search lines - and that was after playing with it for a while. Obviously there needs to be some rules reducing the number of checks (and better move ordering). I think it is possible to do it well, but it is complex. Currently, I have a system somewhat similar to Ed's: Checks always in depth 1 & 2 of q-search, plus I "extend" in q-search if the side in check has 1 (or maybe 2, I forget) legal moves. anthony P.S. Zappa gets about 400 knps at RWBC if I remember correctly. It's hardly a fast engine. Even on my opteron it gets only 750 or so, as compared to crafty which gets close to 2M.
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.