Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 16:29:17 09/02/02
Go up one level in this thread
On September 02, 2002 at 17:15:54, Dave Gomboc wrote: >On September 01, 2002 at 13:26:44, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On September 01, 2002 at 09:40:34, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >> >>>pawn=32 in fritz seemingly. that's all you need to know to consider >>>it works for it. >> >>What does that do? I have seen large positional scores out of fritz, >>which suggests (to me) that mtd(f) could cause some problems... > >It means there's a lower granularity of values, so less (re-)searches are >required to arrive at the score. I have believed for some time that this is a >correct decision, because I don't have confidence in the precision of even >centipawn evaluations (much less the millipawn evaluations that Diep years ago >when Vincent based mtd techniques heavily). I didn't know that Fritz actually >had done it, though. > >The range of positional scores is relevant for lazy evaluation schemes, but I >think that issue is pretty well handled by Don Dailey's recommendation. > >Dave I understand that. But that wasn't the issue I was addressing. It was "fritz uses a paw value of 32 or whatever..." And I don't see how that influences mtd(f) as much as an evaluation that produces positional scores that vary from +3.00 to -3.00, no matter what 1.00 means. If an evaluation can produce wild positional scores, then mtd(f) causes problems... It makes it hard to hone in on the right final score, particularly with lazy eval..
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.