Author: Dan Andersson
Date: 16:47:27 08/16/00
Go up one level in this thread
On August 16, 2000 at 19:34:21, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: >On August 16, 2000 at 18:52:03, David Rasmussen wrote: > >>My Qsearch usually takes up 70-80 % of the nodes searched. >>What are the, say, 10 best ideas/techniques to cut this number down? > >a) don't qsearch > >b) use futility pruning > >c) use SEE futility pruning > >d) live with it...qsearch % tends to be high in every chessprogram > >>P.S. I am writing a new chess program from scratch and I'm very much in love >>with the scientific beauty of MTD(f). What are the pratical pros and cons of >>doing MTD(f). What are the pitfalls etc. ? > >It causes trouble with search trics that depend on alpha/beta values. But introduces new tricks. Especially if one uses ETC. >Its harder to get a PV. Yep. >It's not necessarily faster than PVS. In the best case MTD and PVS will search the same nodes. And if you use ETC I'm almost certain it will search a smaller tree in the average case. ETC will slow search down, but there are ways to alleviate that. F.ex no ETC the last N plies. >Depends more on large hashtables than other methods. Í would say that it suffers badly from to small TTs instead, maybe even benefitting more from large TTs than other methods. (Thats pure speculation) > >>P.P.S. Why is my chess program code so messy? > >Because its a chessprogram. > >-- >GCP Regards Dan Andersson
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.