Author: Dan Homan
Date: 06:43:45 06/25/98
Go up one level in this thread
I'm not sure the right place to jump into this thread, but here will work... Is the speed-up from incremental move generation the only reason to use killers over the history heuristic? I've runs some quick 'n dirty tests on my program (which does not use incremental move generation... rather I generate all the moves at once and score them for sorting as I generate them), and the history heuristic by itself seems superior (in essentially all the positions I tested) to killers alone or killer+history. Perhaps my testing was flawed (it was very quick) or my implementation, but I was wondering if anyone else had a similar experience. For programs that do incremental move generation (like crafty), killers are surely a win because they don't need to do a full move generation if they get a cutoff. But what about programs that don't use this approach? - Dan
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.