Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Is extension "remaing" good?

Author: Vincent Diepeveen

Date: 05:10:10 08/26/01

Go up one level in this thread


On August 25, 2001 at 23:22:45, Pham Minh Tri wrote:

I see what you mean. No i'm not using this extension and will not
even try. Ed Schroeder is using a completely different type of search
than mine, so it makes no sense IMHO to try it.

I'm using a depth limited search with nullmove R=3 and no other forms
of forward pruning. Not even futility i'm using in qsearch.

Best regards,
Vincent

>On August 25, 2001 at 22:29:22, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>
>>On August 25, 2001 at 21:49:02, Pham Minh Tri wrote:
>>
>>>Hi all,
>>>I have just implemented the extension "remaining": increase 1/4 depth if both
>>>current and previous moves are from hash. This idea I learn from Ed (and read
>>>about it from collection of Dann - see the post "Crafty  will never win a title"
>>>on August 23). So far some my tests show that it is no effect - but the search
>>>tree explodes slightly (5-10%). Does anyone have better result?
>>>Pham
>>
>>Sorry i missed the extension idea, could you explain a bit more clearly?
>>
>>: what does your extension extend now and under which conditions?
>>
>>so if at iteration n, n+1 , n+2 a move m is from the hashtable then
>>you now extend it by 1/4 ply?
>>
>>Best regards,
>>Vincent
>
>I check and extend 1/4 (trying 1/2) ply if current move (computing) is from
>hastable and the move of the last ply (ply-1) is also from it.
>
>I re-quote the Ed post from Dann's Collection as following. He explained clearly
>about his idea. I just ignore currently the promotion extension:
>
>
>ED-->
>===========================================================================
>Subject: Re: Q. about Rebel extensions
>From: Ed Schröder
>E-mail: rebchess@xs4all.nl
>Message Number: 52186
>Date: May 19, 1999 at 02:32:31
>  In Reply to: Q. about Rebel extensions
>  Message ID: 52090
>  Posted by: Rémi Coulom
>  At: Remi.Coulom@imag.fr
>  On: May 18, 1999 at 03:56:14
>
>>Posted by Rémi Coulom on May 18, 1999 at 03:56:14:
>
>>>Extensions (checks)      :          77.979 (13%)
>>>Extensions (captures)    :           5.807 (1%)
>>>Extensions (king safety) :           1.180 (0%)
>>>Extensions (on depth)    :           7.594 (1%)
>>>Extensions (remaining)   :           1.094 (0%)
>>>Extensions (total)       :          93.654 (16%)
>>>
>>
>>Could you explain what "king safety", "on depth" and "remaining" extensions
>>consist in ?
>
>Extensions (King Safety): when one of the kings is in danger an extra
>ply is taken.
>
>Extensions (on depth): on depth means the ply before Q-Search. Various
>extensions (extra plies) are tried to avoid a horizon effect. To name a few:
>#1 if the last move attacks 2 pieces.
>#2 if the king is in check.
>#3 if the last move is capture that gains material (static evaluation).
>#4 cases like bba2 wrb3 wrf7
>#5 piece attacks like h2-h3 attacking the black knight on g4.
>#6 moves that escape from (#5) such as Nf6, Nh6, Ne5
>#7 certain types of mate threats recognized by the evaluation function.
>
>All of this is safe-guarded with several forward prune techniques to
>avoid the tree to explode. Next, extensions on depth is limited to take
>2 or 3 of such extra plies also to avoid the tree to explode.
>
>Extensions (remaining):  A number of the list of "Extensions on depth"
>is also tried in the tree. Here I use fractional increments of 1/4 ply. One
>idea is to push the hash table entries of best lines. In other words, if
>the current move is from the hash table and the move of the previous
>ply too then the depth is increased with 1/4 ply. Also some promotion
>extensions are tried which increment may vary on their importance.
>
>Ed Schroder



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.