Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 20:33:06 07/31/01
Go up one level in this thread
On July 31, 2001 at 23:24:13, Pham Minh Tri wrote: >I know that we could use endgame tables or endgame functions for end game >period. IMO, codes of EG function are much easier to develop, smaller and >quicker than tables. However, I see that almost all strong programs use EGTBs, >not those functions. Could someone explain to me why or advantages/disadvantages >of EGTB vs EG functions? You have named the advantage of functions. Smaller and quicker. Probably more fun too. But you have to write a new function for KBBK and for KRK and for KQK and for KPK... If you use EGTB, you write one interface to Eugene's code and you are done with it for up to 5 pieces/pawns on the board (6 eventually). You might also use some of the compression techniques that Ersnt Heinz used in his book on scalable search in computer chess. Then you can hold the tablebase files in memory (like he did) and have them run really fast. Or do something altogether different. At any rate, the advantage I see for EGTB is that you solve a general problem. Once completed, you have solved for any tablebase situation.
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.