Author: Edward Screven
Date: 16:12:54 11/20/97
Go up one level in this thread
On November 20, 1997 at 18:49:17, John Scalo wrote:
>Q- Is it acceptable to run through the qsearch without ever evaluating
>the position? In other words only the material balance is considered. It
>sure is a lot faster and most positional eval's don't include a term
>worth more than half a pawn. But there are some obvious dangers such as
>ending up with a king in the middle of the board open to attack, etc. I
>suppose it's a tradeoff of speed/quality of play. Is the speed worth it?
i tried this once. my program not only played worse, but it scored
lower on test suites. but you should try it for yourself -- it should
be easy to implement.
i think a better direction is to work on forward pruning to reduce your
branching factor. for example, do you use a static exchange evaluator
to nick losing captures? how about razoring and futility cutoffs?
also, you might try lazy evaluation.
- edward screven
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.