Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 21:18:58 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 That is one way to do it. Storing values outside alpha/beta (referred to as fail-soft alpha/beta) also works...
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.