Author: Tord Romstad
Date: 02:49:44 07/07/04
Go up one level in this thread
On July 07, 2004 at 05:43:49, Tony Werten wrote: >On July 07, 2004 at 05:22:22, Tord Romstad wrote: > >>On July 07, 2004 at 02:26:30, Tony Werten wrote: >> >>>>5 3 .6 mate-at-a-glance >>> >>>From my experience, the effort is higher, since it's a very dangerous piece of >>>code. Specially since other wrong scoring seems to get damped by alpha beta, but >>>a wrong score by a maag is deadly. >> >>This depends on how you use it. When I used static mate detection, I didn't >>return a mate score, but just used the information for move ordering. The >>mating >>move was searched first. This works very well, even if the mate detection is >>correct only 99% of the time. > >Yes, but that's not a mate at a glance but a move ordering trick. Technically speaking you are right, but the effect is exactly the same as a "mate at a glance". >Less effort but also less result. I agree about less effort, but less result? The only disadvantage of using the static mate threat detection only for move ordering is that you have to do an extra makemove/unmakemove before returning a mate score. Not an expense worth mentioning ... Tord
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.