Author: Gian-Carlo Pascutto
Date: 00:28:54 09/02/02
Go up one level in this thread
On September 02, 2002 at 02:19:08, Ricardo Gibert wrote: >This isn't clear. Remember the hardware is not searching near the root. It is >only searching near the leaves. The vast majority of the time, all you may want >to show near the leaves is if all the "relevant" positions in the subtree are >greater or less than a certain bound. For this mtd(f) would fit the bill just >fine despite the absence of a hash table as long as a research does not need to >be performed. But *if* a research needs to be performed, you're looking at an average of about 10-15 iterations to converge on a new value (true MTD, their bisection approach is less efficient). Because of the lack of hash, thats a tenfold overhead. If we assume they have move ordering comparable to current programs, they needed a research about 1/10 of the time. Very very roughly, this means that their searches would take about double the nodes than they would have with a normal search. -- GCP
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.