Author: Ernst A. Heinz
Date: 01:02:50 10/25/00
Go up one level in this thread
Hi Pham, >In the book "Scalable Search in Computer Chess" you listed the move-ordering >scheme as following: >1. hashed move >2. good capture moves >3. killer moves >4. history moves, >5. statically pre-sorted remaining moves >6. bad capture moves. Unfortunately, you do not quote my text correctly. The book actually lists the following on page 21. 1. Hashed move from transposition tables, 2. "good" capture moves in MVV/ LVA order or sorted by SEE gain, 3. killer moves, 4. history moves, 5. statically pre-sorted remaining moves, 6. "bad" capture moves in MVV / LVA order or sorted by SEE gain. >My question are: >1. How about pv move? Do you install them into hash table? If yes, what is >benefit (I think if we keep separating pv and hashed moves, we will have more >good moves for searching first). Why do you deem PV moves to be a special case? They are just the best moves at PV nodes and get stored there in the transposition tables. Drawing everything from the transposition tables only, simplifies and speeds up the code. You may even think about not implementing a separate PV array at all. >2. How do you divide good and bad capture moves? Are the bad capture moves >really "bad" therefore you listed them in the end (I mean they would be higher >order)? The "good / bad" classification relates to SEE and cannot be done by MVV / LVA only. >3. Could you explain more details about statically pre-sorted remaining moves? General description for any static ordering scheme you may think of, e.g., forward moves first. Hopefully, you like the book -- please enjoy! =Ernst=
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.