Author: Bas Hamstra
Date: 11:21:12 04/25/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 24, 2001 at 20:44:45, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On April 24, 2001 at 15:19:42, Bas Hamstra wrote: > >>On April 23, 2001 at 23:19:39, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On April 23, 2001 at 11:33:52, Bas Hamstra wrote: >>> >>>>On April 23, 2001 at 11:03:32, Ulrich Tuerke wrote: >>>> >>>>It is easy to check out where it goes wrong, by comparing the values with and >>>>without FP. Values are in my case mostly different when the capture is checking. >>>>Also in the endgame it is risky, when for instance a pawncapture brings the king >>>>out of the "square of the pawn". >>>> >>>>In my case it does not matter much, because you will get a cut anyway the next >>>>ply. It saves a call to ab/evaluate, that's about it. I can't see how that gives >>>>enourmous gains. And it doesn't in my case. >>>> >>>> >>>>Bas. >>> >>>What it does is cut the total q-search nodes by 1/2 at least. That is a pretty >>>significant savings... >> >>Not in my case, no. Skipping SEE losing captures cuts 50%. Then, if I want >>reasonably accurate scores, futility cuts another 15% or so. However I do not >>consider any checking capture as futile. > > >I don't follow. Skipping SEE losing captures cuts 50% is what you said? That >is what I said.. the q-search gets 50% _smaller_.. > >?? > >Bob No, wait. YOU said futility pruning cuts 50% qnodes. *I* said it gives only 15% or so but pruning SEE losers away cuts 50%. Look above :-) Bas.
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.