Author: Russell Reagan
Date: 19:44:28 08/20/02
Go up one level in this thread
On August 20, 2002 at 21:52:05, Robert Hyatt wrote: >That's backward. A hash hit near the root saves a _huge_ amount of work. >Just think how big the sub-tree is one ply away from the root, compared to >the sub-tree one ply away from a tip position... His concern was that a false hash hit near the root would cause a blunder. If you didn't probe for the first (say) 2 plies, you'd still get that same result from the hash hit you got at ply 3, right? Maybe I'm not thinking about it correctly, but as far as I can tell, the only *extra* work you're doing here is a 2 ply search, which is nothing. Unless I'm missing something (which wouldn't be the first time...) Russell
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.