Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 12:47:51 09/13/02
Go up one level in this thread
On September 13, 2002 at 15:10:47, Dieter Buerssner wrote:
>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).
>>>
>>>Regards,
>>>Dieter
>>
>>
>>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.
>
>Regards,
>Dieter
Right. Misspoke.
Bob
This page took 0.04 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.