Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Poor man's singular extension

Author: Robert Hyatt

Date: 20:26:59 08/15/01

Go up one level in this thread


On August 15, 2001 at 23:23:53, Scott Gasch wrote:

>Recently I've been messing around with singular extension (s.ex).  As I see it,
>the problem with s.ex is that with alpha beta you do not have the precise value
>of a move -- you only have an upper or lower bound on the score.  I am doing
>fail hard alpha beta and have been playing with this:
>
>If all moves in a position are terrible (less than alpha - delta1) except one...
>and that one is within delta2 of alpha, search that one move over again one ply
>deeper.  I started doing this with delta1 = MATE-300 as I was hoping to find
>positions where there is only one move that will save you from mate.  I've been
>gradually reducing delta1, though, and dumping the positions where it would
>extend.  I also thought about changing the second condition: only extending if
>the one move was > alpha (that would have to mean it's a PV node because if it
>was a FH it would have returned immediately and never get to this code).
>
>What is the typical way to implement s.ex?  What do you think about the ideas
>above?  How do you do it?
>
>Thanks,
>Scott


A good starting point is the paper on SE in the ICCA journal.  I would guess
1988-1992 (I am not at the office so I don't have the journals handy to look
it up).

It is pretty complicated to implement if you do the full implementation as
described by Hsu/Campbell.  There are lots of pitfalls to overcome...



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.