Author: Severi Salminen
Date: 03:21:00 12/30/01
Go up one level in this thread
>I do not see the point of it. >The point is to see the number of nodes that I can save if >I have the same order of moves and could use SEE to get the same result as >qsearch. > >The nodes in the beginning of the qsearch are not nodes that I could avoid by >using SEE. Now I'm totally lost. SEE (static exchange evaluator) is used primarly to sort captures more accurately. It gives more accurate info than if ordered just by MVV/LVA. SEE can also be used to prune seemingly losing captures (or captures that are not good enough) in qsearch. I don't understand the second paragraph: "The nodes in the beginning of the qsearch are not nodes that I could avoid by using SEE.". Of course not because they are the first nodes where you would apply the pruning characteristics of SEE. But what comes to definitions: every node where you apply eval() is qsearch node. Are you counting this way? What is the ratio of qnodes/allnodes if you count them this way in your engine? So increment qnodes in the beginning of qsearch and nodes after you call qsearch() in search(). I'm just curious and I think you have different definition for node than other programmers. Severi
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.