Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: developing Junior (and other pro programs)

Author: Robert Hyatt

Date: 07:22:46 09/03/02

Go up one level in this thread


On September 03, 2002 at 06:58:41, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote:

>On September 02, 2002 at 19:33:48, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>
>>Near the tips of the tree?  traditional killers, captures, whatever, works
>>quite well out there...  about as well as hashing, since the depths will be
>>so shallow...
>
>If you do them, yes. But IIRC, the DB hardware had no killers, just
>MVV/LVA captures.
>
>--
>GCP


I actually don't remember whether it does or not, but I suspect not.  But
captures are _the_ most common refutation move anyway.  I would never argue
that their alpha/beta hardware search is as good as a software alpha/beta
search, for lots of reasons.  But if all you are doing 99.9% of the time,
is just proving that a score is >X or <X, then no re-searches are needed, and
efficiency is not an issue whatsoever with respect to hashing.  Only when you
need an exact match is that an issue... and with a parallel search, it is not
as big an issue there because you are doing the searches in parallel so that
hashing can't help anyway, except serendipitously...



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.