Author: Tony Werten
Date: 03:58:26 04/10/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 09, 2001 at 22:25:14, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On April 09, 2001 at 21:17:59, Normand M. Blais wrote: > >>On April 09, 2001 at 18:20:07, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On April 09, 2001 at 16:49:21, Normand M. Blais wrote: >>> >>>>On April 09, 2001 at 16:21:56, Andrei Fortuna wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>>positional score > 2 PAWN_VALUE. And that will hurt my quiescence and my >>>>>futility pruning if I assume that 2*PAWN_VALUE is max positional score. It all >>>>>boils down to the magnitude of the positional scores versus pawn value, I think >>>>>I have to choose either to keep big bonuses and turn futility off (or set a >>>>>bigger margin for futility but in that case it would make futility more >>>>>inefficient) or keep small bonuses and enjoy the reductions I get from futility >>>>>and quiescence. >>>> >>>>What if you multiply the value of the material by 10 (i.e. pawn = 1000 Knight = >>>>3000 Bishop = 3000 Rook = 5000 Queen = 10000 ) and keep the positional score as >>>>it is. >>>> >>>>N.M.B. >>> >>> >>>Then you become _very_ materialistic. You will grab pawns whenever >>>possible, even if it wrecks your king position. You will grab a pawn but >>>leave your opponent with an outside passer that wins. Etc... >> >>I understand that the positional score is related to the material score (the >>pawn or tempi being the unit of measurement). I made a mistake by suggesting >>that the material value can be magnified without adjusting both the positional >>bonuses and penalties. But would it be a good idea to have one more digit to >>work with? A value of 1000, for instance, could represent 100.0. And scores >>like 112.4 and 112.8 could be set apart? Not a sophisticated idea but anyhow. >> >>Regards, >> >>N.M.B. > >I don't personally think the idea of "millipawns" makes a lot of sense. That >is _very_ fine resolution. I used it in Cray Blitz, and in early versions of >Crafty, but it adds to the hash entry size for one thing... XiniX is using it. Not because it makes any sence but I like the idea that I can give small bonusses for some stupid positional thing that I like, without messing up the eval and still having the idea that if two positions score almost the same, it will prefer the one I like. Gives me a sort of personal tough feeling. ( As I said, it's not because it makes any sence ) cheers, Tony
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.