Author: Landon Rabern
Date: 11:00:16 07/19/00
Go up one level in this thread
On July 19, 2000 at 13:22:47, Andrew Dados wrote: >On July 19, 2000 at 12:03:10, Landon Rabern wrote: > >>I have been discarding all captures where attackervalue>DefenderValue in my >>q-search which speeds it up significantly, but I know that it is throwing away >>some captures that are good. So I implemented a SEE function. The SEE returns >>the correct value on tests I have run. When I put this into my program so that >>if (attackervalue>DefenderValue)&&(SEE>=0) I keep the move as well, I got worse >>results on the WAC test suite. Before I put the see in I got 270/300 at 60 >>seconds per move and after I got 257/300 at 60 seconds per move. >> >>Is it just that there are no capture sequences in this test that need the extra >>captures, or is there something wrong with my SEE function? >> >>Thanks for any help, >> >> >>Landon W. Rabern > >It would be of help if you post some relevant positions. I may just guess now >that if you do check detection in qsearch you may find some mating combinations >with 'losing captures', when recapturing piece is overloaded simply, so in next >move capture is mate. (Or you may do some non-capturing,checking moves in >qsearch which complicates matters still). With SEE you miss those. Question is >if average speedup of SEE in non-tactical positions offsets those few missed by >using SEE.... > >-Andrew- I do not do checks in q-search. The problem is that I should be missing fewer tactical positions with SEE, than with just throwing all captures out where attackerValue>defenderValue. Landon
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.