Author: Tony Werten
Date: 01:43:31 08/04/01
Go up one level in this thread
On August 03, 2001 at 16:56:08, Artem Pyatakov wrote: >Has anyone here had any luck with Enhanced Transposition Cutoffs in their >program? > >Just out of curiosity (and ease of SLOW/SIMPLE implementation of this idea), I >decided to try it. I've tried it. After normal hash lookup, before nullmove. Just generate all moves, makemove, lookup, unmake. I just took cutoffs if the score had an exact flag, because I got to confused. ie The score must have an above_beta flag and -score has to be <=-alfa (or something). Didn't notice any (overall) improvement. Tony > >The way I implemented it (just as a test), is by increasing move ordering >"priorityScore" for successor moves that promise a cutoff and thus trying these >moves first (but after the hash move). But for some strange reason, I can't >even get it to marginally reduce the number of nodes. > >This does not make sense to me, since I think that: >1) It's supposed to reduce the number of nodes at least somewhat >2) The reason most do not use is because the number of nodes that it eliminates >trades off with the computational time, NOT because this approach does not work >completely. > >Any ideas? suggestions? > >Thank you. > >Artem
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.