Author: Peter Fendrich
Date: 14:41:57 05/05/99
Go up one level in this thread
On May 05, 1999 at 13:51:09, KarinsDad wrote: >On May 05, 1999 at 13:30:59, Dave Gomboc wrote: > >>On May 05, 1999 at 11:32:15, KarinsDad wrote: >> >[snip] >>> >>>I am doing the opposite. I extend whenever anything interesting is going on >>>(such as non-quiescence) almost as far as I can go. I then mark the >>>non-quiescent children nodes as being searched so that they do not get >>>re-searched (when I get to the next ply). >> >>You are supposed to continue to extend the search from the positions where it >>first decided to extend in all subsequent searches! Otherwise, you will >>encounter the depth-valley effect. Do you have access to Singular Extensions: >>Adding Selectivity to Brute-Force Search? (1991, title from memory). It might >>be in a journal at a local university library. > >I do not fully understand what you are saying here. Could you please elaborate? >What is the depth-valley effect? And no, I do not have access to that book (at >least not at the moment). > >> >>I was going to quote some stuff from it (including definitions for PV- and >>FH-singular) but I'm not sure where it is at the moment. If I uncover it I'll >>let you know. > >Thanks. Please do. > >KarinsDad :) The article can be found in: ICCA Journal, Vol. 11, No. 4 "Singular Extensions: Adding Selectivity to Brute-Force Searching" by Anantharaman, T.S., Campbell, M.S. and Hsu, F. //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.