Author: Pat King
Date: 12:54:32 12/13/00
Go up one level in this thread
On December 13, 2000 at 14:15:06, martin fierz wrote:
>hi,
>
>after reading the description of mtd(f) it seemed to me that this kind of
>algorithm could only work if the whole tree still fits in the hashtable, and
>that once it doesnt fit in any more it would get terribly inefficient. is this
>right or wrong?
Definitely wrong. A bigger table helps, just as it helps PVS.
>are there any chess programs using mtd(f)?
Mine, although it's admittedly in a pretty primitive state. ("Zotron" on fics,
giving away rating points in a game near you!) There are other, much stronger
programs using it successfully, and I've had very few search related problems.
>i once read that the
>most popular search is PVS where the first move gets searched normally and all
>others with a minimal window - is this correct?
This is correct when PVS' first guess is correct. When it's not, PVS does
multiple searches just like MTD. I did a rather close comparision of the two
with my own code. This testing gave PVS a very slight edge, but this was based
on just a couple of positions, and I don't think the difference is significant.
I chose to go with MTD for its simplicity.
>
>cheers
> martin
Pat
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.