Author: Carlos del Cacho
Date: 09:27:09 09/28/00
Go up one level in this thread
On September 28, 2000 at 00:18:58, Robert Hyatt wrote: >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... Yes, that was the approach I used before. But it seems to work worse now. Suppose I get to a node where lazy eval gets applied. Backing up the tree I have no idea it did so. Suppose I fall high. I can't store this score as a low bound on the true score unless I store some info of the window used, because if researched with other alpha-beta window score can get lower than this. I'll keep thinking about it. Carlos
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.