Computer Chess Club Archives




Subject: Re: MTD: an observation and a question

Author: Dieter Buerssner

Date: 12:10:47 09/13/02

Go up one level in this thread

On September 13, 2002 at 01:28:52, Robert Hyatt wrote:

>On September 12, 2002 at 11:54:11, Dieter Buerssner wrote:
>>On September 12, 2002 at 09:28:28, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>>The gotcha is to use fail-soft.  And this probably requires a few changes
>>>to how you back up scores.  IE you might do something like this:
>>>        v=Search(-beta, -alpha, etc);
>>>        if (v > alpha) {
>>>            if (v > beta) return beta;
>>>            alpha=v;
>>>        }
>>>That return beta is not fail-soft.  it should be changed to
>>>            if (v > beta) return v;
>>This is not enough. You need a new variable, for example best (intitialized to
>>some very bad score)
>>         v=Search(-beta, -alpha, etc);
>>         if (v > best) {
>>           best = v;
>>           /* And to the PV discussion: here the "semi-PV" must be updated */
>>           if (v > alpha) {
>>             if (v > beta) return v;
>>             alpha=v;
>>           }
>>         }
>>and out of the search loop:
>>  return best;
>>Your code snippet (Crafty, too) is essentially fail hard. In the parent node,
>>after you returned best, you end up returning alpha in most cases (which is
>>almost the same, as you would return beta in the fail high node).
>Right.  This was one of _many_ changes I did when I tried mtd(f) a couple of
>years back.  I left a bit of the "fail-soft" code in place, because it didn't
>make any real difference, but I did take the piece you mentioned above out
>(starting alpha off very low).

?? Starting alpha very low should make your search rather slow. I believe, one
really needs a new variable "bestscore" besides alpha.


This page took 0.01 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 07 Jul 11 08:48:38 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.