Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 12:00:43 07/21/99
Go up one level in this thread
On July 20, 1999 at 19:51:57, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >On July 20, 1999 at 17:30:54, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>On July 20, 1999 at 17:26:49, Dave Gomboc wrote: >>[snip] >>>None of the commercials I know of provide source code, so this might be tough to >>>arrange. Is your opinion that Crafty would be adequate? >>I see possible solutions: >>0. We are provided with an object module and permission to use it for the test >>only. >>1. We keep a record of the fastest currently tested implementation. >>2. We hold a contest with prizes for the winning algorithm. > >I nominate the nullmove, >althoug of course alfabeta logically should qualify first, >alfabetapruning isn't very hard to invent. Nullmove is though. > >First prize for that nomination would be: > "best algorithmic improvement of the century" > >Nullmove has been nominated as #1 by me. >Alfabeta as second. >YBW as third. >endgametablebases as 4th. I would disagree on #1, because without alpha/beta, null-move doesn't work at all. So I'd go with alpha/beta, then null-move. YBW isn't a particular algorithm. It is just a noticable fact produced by the way alpha/beta searches a tree, so it is a basic part. I might go along with the concept of 'parallel search' instead, as this will become more and more important is time passes. Probably even more important is the various 'extension' ideas developed over the years... out of check, one-reply, recapture, passed pawn push, singular extensions (and various derivatives), threat extensions, etc....
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.