Author: Severi Salminen
Date: 14:10:08 12/12/00
Go up one level in this thread
>>>This is an interesting problem and I have run a number of experiments, >>>unfortunately with unclear result. In principle the search time to finish a >>>given interation should be "more valuable" since the closer bounds will result >>>in more cutoffs resulting in a higher n/s. Or is that reasoning flawed ? >>> >>>Georg >> >>I don't think that's a good idea. You will be searching last iteration's PV >>first. If at the time you stop your thinking the PV move is differemt you know >>that that move is better at that ply that the ones previously considered. So you >>should play that move IMO. >> >>Carlos > >Argh sorry, my formulation was unclear. Obviously you should always use whatever >search info you got, the only exception being that its not a good idea to use a >value when stoped in the qsearch I guess. > >I was talking about how to distribute the search time. And if it is right that >the time spend to finish an iteration is "worth" more than the one used to start >it, then it would make sense to try to search all first moves as often as >possible. I allways make the PV move after search. So it doesn't matter where the search ends when time is up: in normal search or in qsearch. The PV changes only when the search returns to rootsearch() and finds a score>alpha and <beta. So in PV array we have allways the latest complete information and we don't have to worry about that being corrupted because of time limit. Severi
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.