Author: Alvaro Jose Povoa Cardoso
Date: 14:10:58 07/05/01
Go up one level in this thread
On July 05, 2001 at 14:24:41, Frank Phillips wrote:
>On July 05, 2001 at 07:41:31, Alvaro Jose Povoa Cardoso wrote:
>
>>>Solve this problem for once and for all by only storing mate scores as bounds.
>>>You don't have to cut off on mates.
>>>
>>>bruce
>>
>>If I understand correctly, with this solution there are no mate score
>>adjustments.
>>Am I right?
>>
>>Alvaro Cardoso
>
>Alvaro
>
>This is what I did the last time Bruce explained his scheme - hope I got it
>right.
>
>
>//
>//Adjust mate scores using Bruce Moreland's scheme.
>//
>
>if (abs(value) > MATE-300)
>{
> switch (flag)
> {
> case exact_value:
> if (value > 0)
> {
> flag=lower_bound;//Store mate scores as lower bound.
> value=MATE-300;
> }
> else
> {
> flag=upper_bound;//It could be worse but not better.
> value=-MATE+300;
> }
> break;
> case lower_bound:
> if (value > 0)
> value=MATE-300;
> else
> return; //Do not store >= -MATE (stm mated in N).
> break;
> case upper_bound:
> if (value < 0)
> value=-MATE+300;
> else
> return; //Do not store <= MATE (mate in N).
> break;
> default:
> break;
> }
>}
Is MATE a constant?
Best regards,
Alvaro Cardoso
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.