Author: Tony Werten
Date: 00:35:42 08/03/01
Go up one level in this thread
On August 03, 2001 at 03:27:33, Tony Werten wrote: >On August 03, 2001 at 01:08:22, Pham Minh Tri wrote: > >>Hi all, >> >>I saw that my weak engine quickly lost some games or missed some other victories >>by not recognising many common combinations. I have written codes for detecting >>them and tried many extensions. Unfortunately, they made the search tree grew >>exponentially (2-6 times slower) but did not help much, many combinations were >>still 4 or 5 plies deeper than the full search deep (8-9, some branches are >>extended to 13-15). The situation was even worse when a combination did not make >>any check or capture before mate. >> >>Could someone give me some suggestions/comments? > >Well, at least a useless one: You have to search deeper. > >Be carefull with extensions though. You have to limit them. The idea behind most >extensions is to find something that otherwise would be hidden behind the >horizon. > >A threat extension is a clear example of this (after heavy fail low on nullmove >). If you do nothing you'll be checkmated, so extend. But do you really want to >do that when there are still 8 plies of search left ? Those 8 ply should find >the correct continuation, not your extension. > >Tony BTW, you do have a quiescence search do you ? > > >>Thanks in advance. >>Pham
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.