Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 06:20:28 09/24/00
Go up one level in this thread
On September 24, 2000 at 00:04:33, Mike Adams wrote: >I am going to give some numbers of how long it takes pulsar to search the >following postion to depths 6 and 7 with and without check extensions. I picked >this postion from one of pulsars games because it is the typical kind of postion >in which there are many check threats and the search blows up with check >extensions. > >[D] 8/1Q6/2r1p1kp/3r1p2/1B3Pp1/PP2q3/6PP/R2R1K2 w - - > >to search 5 depth without check extensions is 21,840 calls of search and qsearch >to search depth 5 with check extensions is 43,245 calls of search and qsearch > >to search depth 6 without check extensions is 60,255 calls of search and qsearch >to search depth 6 with check extensions is 220,859 calls of search and qsearch > >to search depth 7 without check extensions is 217,524 calls >to search depth 7 with check extensions is 845,443 calls > >As you can see depth 7 without check extensions is less calls than depht 6 with >check extensions. As far as how i do my checkextesnions goes basicly what I do >is that if in search and in check call at detph rather than depht - 1. Of >course i dont do this at the root. I can and probably will fiddle around with >pulsar to see if it plays better without check extensions or modified check >extensions but i was wondering if I could get some tips on if its ok for search >to blow up or are there ways to shorten it. One thing i noticed is that in this >postion if I just allow check extensions to kick in at depht =1 or depth =2 , >the last two ply searched as depth counts down, search hardly blows up as much. > >to search depth 7 with check extension only if incheck at depth 1 or 2 is >418,213 calls rather than 845,443 with full extensions and to search depth 6 >with check extensions only on in the last two ply searched, 1 or 2, calls is >83,000 compared to 60,255 with no check extensions or 220,859 with full >extensions. > > thanks for any tips you can give me > Mike Adams That is simply part of the check extension "cost". The problem _always_ is that you extend the right moves, plus (unfortunately) a lot of lines that don't need to be extended at all. The question is, are you stronger with or without them???
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.