Author: William H Rogers
Date: 12:12:51 05/07/02
Go up one level in this thread
On May 07, 2002 at 13:44:10, Christophe Theron wrote: >On May 07, 2002 at 11:11:38, William H Rogers wrote: > >>On May 06, 2002 at 22:38:01, Christophe Theron wrote: >> >>> >>>You mean that Sargon I was using a SEE? >>> >>>Because as far as I know Sargon II and the next versions were not. They were >>>using a real QSearch instead, which made them much stronger. >>> >>> >>> >>> Christophe >> >>What Sargon I did with its exchange evaluator is to compile a list of all hits >>on square and then see had the most control it or its opponent. Very >>rudentmentary at most. It was very much like that proposed by David Levy in one >>of his earliest books on chess functions. > > >So I guess it was only used at the root of the search? > >I think it would have been too expensive to use deeper in the search? Why do you think that Sargon 1 ran so slow? They learned a lot after that and Sargon 2 was much better and faster. > > > > Christophe
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.