Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 11:00:36 01/22/98
Go up one level in this thread
On January 22, 1998 at 12:21:05, Bruce Moreland wrote: > >On January 22, 1998 at 08:05:24, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>How can they be cut off since the real PV move has not yet been >>searched, >>so we have no idea what the true score should be? > >He estimates based upon the result of the previous iteration. He >assumes that the first move *will* return the same score as it did in >the previous iteration. > >I'm not arguing that this is a good idea, but I don't think it will take >twice as long to finish a ply, like you suggested in another post. > >bruce The math part is simple. The PV takes longer to search than all the rest of the moves, in general. If you have 2 PV's, the math is a killer. Would be real easy to test, just skip the first move at the front of each iteration and then come back at the end and pick it up. I can run this easily although I don't see any way out of the time penalty. Note that 2x assumes that the best move from previous ply is best at this ply, which is true most of the time.
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.