Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 10:02:49 09/27/00
Go up one level in this thread
On September 27, 2000 at 12:10:00, Carlos del Cacho wrote: >On September 27, 2000 at 09:26:45, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On September 27, 2000 at 07:47:18, Bas Hamstra wrote: >> >>>Supposing no "lazy-errors" at all were made, does anyone know if there are >>>serious side-effects to lazy eval? >> >>None at all. Except that guaranteeing this is a bit hard. :) >> >> >> >>> >>>I one experiment that I yet have to repeat, it seems that NPS increases, but >>>Depth (as averaged over 300 wac positions) does not. >>> >>>I would like to know if others have seen alike or other problems with LE. >>> >>> >>>Regards, >>>Bas Hamstra. >> >>It has been used forever. As a classic trade-off between speed and accuracy. > >Just a question related with this. Since I implemented lazy eval in my program I >don't store the value returned by search in the hash table when there's a fail >high or a fail low. I just store beta or alpha instead. Is this correct ? > >Thanks in advance, >Carlos No it isn't correct as the hashtablestores the moves before that will pick up the score and store it. Apart from that you will give cutoffs with lazy evaluation in positions where not lazy evaluating will not give a cutoff. Now last but not least the more efficient your search will get the less profit you will get from transpositions as you don't store 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.