Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: ... a 'deferring' DTM EGT algorithm

Author: Vincent Diepeveen

Date: 07:35:32 07/13/02

Go up one level in this thread


On July 13, 2002 at 03:45:55, GuyHaworth wrote:

you don't need DTM indeed. i go for win/draw/loss here.

>
>It is correct to say that it is possible to 'defer' assigning 'DTM = m', i.e.
>
>a)  not doing it at the first possible retrograde cycle,
>
>b)  indeed, doing it in cycle 'm+c' where c = 0 or 1, I forget
>
>The Wu/Beal algorithm, published in the journals IS and ICGA_J, does so, and
>brings efficiencies in so doing.
>
>
>Past practice, including EN's, had been to set DTM=m as soon as possible,
>reducing it later if possible.  To do so is not an 'error', because the
>algorithm is organised to include the possibility of reducing 'm' later.
>
>
>g



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.