Author: Uri Blass
Date: 22:52:55 09/02/02
Go up one level in this thread
On September 02, 2002 at 20:26:30, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >On September 01, 2002 at 12:08:21, Uri Blass wrote: > >Uri, i posted my answer at 11:55, you answerred at 12:08. >That's 13 minutes. > >How the HELL can you have looked up MTD in the meantime, >what it is and what it is doing, and where are your experiments >with MTD? I did not try MTD. > >For MOVEI it sure works as long are your eval is stupid. > I do not know but I do not like ideas that mean not knowing the main line. I believe that knowledge can be used so I prefer not to try ideas that tell me "you do not know the main line and even if you try to construct it from the hash tables it may be wrong" I read in the past that the pv of Fritz7 can be wrong because they use MTD and this reason is enough for me not to use MTD in the way that it is used in Fritz(without knowing the correct main line). I may want to extend the main line of the previous pv in part of the cases(I do not do it today and I decided to stop the work on movei until I learn more about C) The point is that if I do not know the correct pv I cannot do it. This is not the first thing to do in movei and better use of the hash tables is the first thing to do because today they are used only for better order of moves. >It would remove a lot of discussion about fritz here too. >like the stupid comments you don't nullmove in your PV. > >WHICH PV DO YOU TALK ABOUT? Maybe it is a mistake (I did not check it) but it is clearly not logical to do null move search after the first ply of the pv if you want the exact score and the only case when it is logical not to care about the exact score is in one of the last iterations of the search because time in the first iterations is not important. Uri
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.