Author: Michael Neish
Date: 22:59:57 05/09/00
Go up one level in this thread
>Consider two programs which both reach 9 plies searched, but one has quiescent
>search, SEE, and various extensions and the other does not. Again, the
>definition is misleading. I would like to see a definition like this:
>1. minply {due to NULL-move, etc) is the shallowest actual search depth (IOW
>brute force depth)
>2. aveply {is the actual search depth with assumption that NULL move or
>whatever pruning mechanism is sound}
>3. maxply {due to extensions, quiescent search, etc} is the maximum depth
>actually visited.
I see, so you're saying that some programs might be measuring different things
... I didn't think of that. I would have expected the number of times that
Search() had been called iteratively as the definition of ply depth, and assumed
everyone was doing the same.
I remember playing Hiarcs against a (non-commercial) program that was searching
about twice as deep and still got smashed.
Cheers,
Mike.
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.