Author: Andrew Williams
Date: 01:25:24 04/12/02
Go up one level in this thread
On April 11, 2002 at 17:17:48, martin fierz wrote: >On April 11, 2002 at 05:07:20, Andrew Williams wrote: > >>On April 11, 2002 at 03:58:01, martin fierz wrote: >> >>>On April 11, 2002 at 02:22:55, Alejandro Dubrovsky wrote: >>> >>>>On April 10, 2002 at 21:02:51, Dann Corbit wrote: >>>> >>>>>On April 10, 2002 at 19:40:45, Matthias Gemuh wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>Almost everyone here speaks AlphaBeta :(. >>>>> >>>>>Vincent uses MTD(f), IIRC. >>>>>Smallpotato's author uses MTD(f). >>>>>KnightCap uses MTD(f). >>>>> >>>>>There are maybe 6-7 others who like it. >>>> >>>>I use it, but i don't like it. Search instabilities seem harder to handle. Next >>>>version of smallpotato will probably switch to aspiration search. >>>> >>>>Alejandro >>> >>>i use MTD in my checkers program. it searches smaller trees, but also has >>>drawbacks. i agree on the search instabilities, and AFAIK, you cannot get a PV >>>with MTD - which makes understanding why it played a move harder... or is there >>>a way to get a PV? >> >>I get mine out of my transposition table. >> >>Andrew > >so do i, but you have no guarantee that you get the whole PV, because an entry >in the TT might have been overwritten... > >cheers > martin Yeah. When I met Frans Morsch at a WMCC in London, he said he liked the idea of MTD(f) but didn't like the idea of not being able to get the correct PV. Andrew
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.