Author: Peter Fendrich
Date: 02:35:27 09/23/04
Go up one level in this thread
On September 23, 2004 at 05:10:40, martin fierz wrote: >On September 23, 2004 at 04:14:15, Tony Werten wrote: > >>On September 23, 2004 at 04:10:18, martin fierz wrote: >> >>>[snip] >>> >>>>There is _no_ overhead. It is done only at the root, once per iteration. For a >>>>12 ply search, a total of 12 times. That won't use measurable CPU time. The >>>>point is that root move ordering is critical for efficiency.. >>> >>>exactly how critical for efficiency would you believe it to be? >> >>Depends on the bestmove. If that is constant, it's less important than after a >>rootfaillow. >> >>Tony > >ha! what kind of an answer is that :-) > >seriously though: it's clear that there is some importance to it, but can >anybody quantify it? e.g. like this: "ordering root moves by size of subtrees >gains X elo compared to constant static ordering done at ply 1". > >cheers > martin With a perfect root move ordering you wouldn't even need to search :-) I know it's not an answer but it shows some potential in good move ordering... /Peter
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.