Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 07:06:24 11/22/00
Go up one level in this thread
On November 22, 2000 at 05:38:32, martin fierz wrote: >hi, > >i was wondering about this PV-hashtable thing: in my checkers program, i do not >generate a separate PV. i have two hashtables, a 'shallow' and a 'deep' one, >positions close to the root of the tree are stored in shallow, the rest in deep. >in shallow, i take care not to fill the table and not to overwrite entries. i >took this idea from the crafty source code. in deep i overwrite everything >without looking twice. question: i have no PV, but i have a guarantee that for >the first 10 ply i have a hash move - because thats about what fits in shallow. >for the next 10 ply i won't have a hash move. do you think that this is a >serious problem? should i be generating a PV and stuffing hash moves back in the >table (that surely costs some speed...)? typical search depths are 15-19 ply in >a couple of seconds. do these last 5-9 ply really matter? > >cheers > martin They are often important for debugging, more than anything else. IE the goal is to play the right move. Nothing says you have to have the right PV, when playing a game. But if you can't see the PV when testing, you have a harder problem to understand what is going on and why. DB didn't have a separate PV because the hardware didn't support the idea. They seemed to play just fine. So yes, it can work...
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.