Author: Ulrich Tuerke
Date: 04:42:00 11/04/00
Go up one level in this thread
On November 04, 2000 at 00:48:52, TEERAPONG TOVIRAT wrote: >Hi, >Is fail-soft alpha beta too slow? >I see most programs prefer fail-hard version. >Thanks for any comment. >Teerapong IMO, either methods has its benefit. I understand that fail-hard is a bit faster than fail-soft because "best" is already initialized to alpha, whereas it's "- infinity" in fail-soft. So in case, the search does successfully return a value out of the initial alpha-beta-window, I expect fail-hard to be a bit less node-consuming. However, if you encounter a value outside the initial alpha-beta region, the fail-soft algo may give you a bound out side alpha-beta, whereas fail-hard can at most give the bounds alpha or beta itaself. Uli
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.