Author: David Rasmussen
Date: 03:31:42 01/06/01
Go up one level in this thread
On January 05, 2001 at 23:42:45, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On January 05, 2001 at 14:41:51, David Rasmussen wrote: > >>I was wondering why some of the clever ideas I've been reading about, aren't >>used in the programs I know of. >> >>ETC, Enhanced Transposition Cutoff, seems like a very good idea and have been >>tested to perform well in practice. Why isn't it used? >> >>I can't think of any more ideas right now... > > >I tried it a long while back when Jonathan Schaeffer suggested it to me. I >didn't have any success with it. It made the tree about 10% smaller, but the >extra work offset that almost exactly. As a result, it was no real improvement If it balances out at relatively shallow searches, wouldn't it mean that it would actually be better in deep searches? I mean, that overhead is constant, but 10% of the nodes is a scalable improvement. Also, did you remember not to do it at th last 2-4 plies? (of course you did, just asking) >and I decided to stick with KISS... Don't we all ;) Oh, BTW, what is KISS?
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.