Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 13:10:43 10/03/01
Go up one level in this thread
On October 03, 2001 at 16:02:26, Torstein Hall wrote: >What if you run two paralelle search/chess processes. One going very fast with >very little evaluation. The other going slow, with a big evaluation. The fast >one always start searching on the move calculated by the slow process with the >big evaluation, just checking for big materiall loss, tactical stupidities >further down the tree. If it find one, the fast process sends a message goes >back to the slow process and tells it do start work on the next best move. > >Then you perhaps can have the best from two "worlds". Intelligent search, with >no tactical blunders! > >Torstein Read Jonathan Schaeffer's reports on "Sun Phoenix". He did exactly that. But he did it because he was not getting a very good distributed speedup on larger numbers of processors. So some did a normal chess search together as a group, the rest ran a tactical searcher called "minix". Minix was used to refute moves chosen by the positional program. The problem is trying to rationalize the knowledgeable search vs the tactical search. If the tactical search says your positional move loses material, what do you do? Propose another move? And if _that_ loses material? The search becomes hugely inefficient...
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.