Author: Martin Giepmans
Date: 09:45:30 08/03/01
Go up one level in this thread
On August 03, 2001 at 08:20:28, Pham Minh Tri wrote: >On August 03, 2001 at 06:44:09, Martin Giepmans 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? >>>Thanks in advance. >>>Pham >> >> >>Do you use nullmove or any other kind of pruning to speed up your full search? > >Only nullmove. I use adaptive null move pruning scheme (following the article of >Dr. Heinz). I have tried some other kinds of pruning, but they did not help >much, so I gave them up (but I will try again). Do you als use what Dr. Heinz calls "razoring at (pre-)frontier nodes"? I implemented something similar in my program and it works fine. You get a considerable gain in speed (sometimes with factor 2 or more) with nearly no loss of quality.
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.