Author: Gian-Carlo Pascutto
Date: 04:52:39 06/19/00
Go up one level in this thread
On June 19, 2000 at 02:17:48, Oliver Roese wrote: >Could you shortly give an idea, why this approach could be beneficial?! >Lots of extensions indicate lots of stuff happening. >Searching is designed to overcome tactical barriers. Why then >_reduce_ the search depth? We're not reducing the search depth, but rather decreasing the amount with what we step up with. The idea is to get results even when the extensions would stop the search from finishing otherwise. Now, for a fail-high this may not matter much, as we have the associated move anyway, but in a fail-low situation this may be important to get a reasonable move sooner. You might want to check out the 'Scalable Search Test' thread to see an example were doing a full ply more can cause trouble because of the many mate threats. Esentially, the two most important advantages of iterative deepening search are the move ordering info it gives out and the fact that you can get a move out of it if the search is unfinishe before the timelimit. Therefore, it is interesting to experiment with this to see what the best increment would be. Just setting it to 1 is a bit arbitrary in a world of real numbers. (all of this assuming fractional depth programs of course) -- GCP
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.