Author: KarinsDad
Date: 22:29:18 04/14/00
Go up one level in this thread
On April 15, 2000 at 00:08:41, blass uri wrote:
>On April 14, 2000 at 14:41:08, KarinsDad wrote:
>
>>On April 13, 2000 at 20:32:01, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>
>>[snip]
>>>
>>>You are talking about "forward pruning" which is full of danger. Your
>>>eval likely doesn't understand deep tactics, yet you will be letting it
>>>dictate which moves you search looking for tactics and which you don't.
>>>
>>>It is _very_ difficult to do this and not cause huge search problems...
>>
>>
>>That is why Fathom will be so dangerous ("yeah, right" says all of the old
>>programmers). It does a type of forward pruning. Whether it will be successful
>>with this, only time will tell.
>
>I understand that you mean to selective search(this is what the old programmers
>did) that and not to searching part of the moves to a reduced depth.
>
>
>I think that the first thing to do in order to check these pruning ideas is to
>take a database of about 10,000 comp-comp games(you can use the ssdf games) and
>see if your pruning idea rejects the moves that were played.
>
>If you reject good moves that were played even only in one case out of 1000
>positions then your forward pruning try is not good.
>
>If you only reject some bad moves that were played because of bugs then your
>pruning idea may be good(probability not more than 1/1000000 for an error)
>
>Uri
I agree that this is a place to start, but I think your numbers are way too
restrictive. Many positions have 2 to 4 great moves, not just 1. So, if my
program comes up with the comp chosen move 40% of the time or higher, I will be
feeling pretty good.
KarinsDad :)
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.