Author: KarinsDad
Date: 10:07:42 05/04/99
Go up one level in this thread
On May 04, 1999 at 12:40:05, Andrew Williams wrote: >On May 04, 1999 at 11:26:29, KarinsDad wrote: > >>I was wondering how deeply most programs extended the search at a given ply for >>check. >> >>I implemented singular extensions, check extensions, and capture extensions into >>my code last night, but ran into the problem of check extensions potentially >>expanding the extensions into near infinity. >> >>How many checks do most programs consider is enough when extending? >> >>Thanks, >> >>KarinsDad :) > >My program simply says "if the iterative deepener started this search >with depth=D, don't extend beyond 2*D". This is a naive approach, and >I'd also be interested in hearing what anyone else does. Yes, this sounds naive since I especially do not want to check 14 ply down when I am currently searching Ply 14. I was thinking more along the lines of 8 ply (if you do not get an advantage within 4 moves, then maybe it isn't worth checking), but I am not sure. > >> >>PS. Will, we realized that our nps is way off. We were compiling the code in >>debug mode as opposed to optimized mode. So, our 100 knps went up to 209 knps. >>Duh! > >209knps!! What position? This is on a P3 400 Mhz with super simple material evaluation code (for a lot of positions, the program is still real stupid). It will drop in half at least once I really implement the evaluation. > >Andrew
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.