Author: Antonio Dieguez
Date: 13:47:09 01/21/02
Go up one level in this thread
On January 21, 2002 at 16:30:22, Bas Hamstra wrote: >On January 21, 2002 at 15:56:59, Antonio Dieguez wrote: > >>>It should matter in quiet positions, right? >> >>Well, It should matter depending on how often the pv changes, so may be more in >>unquiet positions. >> >>>Well, here is data, opening >>>position: >>> >>>Rootwindow <-inf, inf> takes 2404K nodes >>>Rootwindow <-50, 50> takes 2420K nodes >>> >>>...to complete 10 ply. >> >>strange, I don't know the logic there, i would have guessed a bigger >>difference. please don't be angry but if that is what I would get in amyan >>regularly I would be sure it has a bug or I made a mistake in the experiment. > >It is possible of course, but I don't think so. It just don't seem to buy me a >lot. As far as I know it has never been proven anyway. Plus (based on only a >couple of tests) I simply don't see it here. but search with alpha+1,beta is better if beta is not infinite. I don't think that using pvs changes that much, the results of your tests, if have done well, are counterintuitive. >>>Convince me with data :-) Should be no big deal to do this little test for >>your engine? Difference? Other position is also fine. >> >>I'm not using much pvs inside the three as it does not help me, may be other >>person may do that quicker. >>Be well... > >Do you use straight alphabeta? PVS might be a tiny bit more efficient. At least >that is what everybody says. But the difference is small IMO. hyatt says that for him, the difference between alphabeta with aspiration and pvs is only 10%, for me is near zero. I use almost straigth alphabeta, for example if beta is alpha+2 then I may wonder if doing pvs is better or not, etc. Best regards... Antonio
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.