Author: Omid David
Date: 11:49:17 10/24/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 24, 2002 at 14:41:24, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On October 24, 2002 at 14:04:07, Fernando Villegas wrote: > >>I wonder if every or some commercial prorams has the same "panic mode" DB had. >>Sometimes I gues they does have one. At leats after some move that does make >>them happy, I have observed that time allotment change, depth of the search >>deepens and so on. Chris, Ed? >>Fernndo > > >I think that since Bert and I first published the "using time wisely" paper in >the JICCA >many years ago, _everybody_ has been doing that in some form or another. For >years, >we watched people bouncing up and down in their chairs hoping their program >would >see that the move it was about to play was the wrong move because the score had >dropped >way down. The only question was could their machine find a better move before >running >out of time. > >We decided to stop doing that and added the "fail-low time extension" idea and >then reported >on it at the next ACM event. Do you have a copy of that paper? >The next year everybody was doing something that >seemed very >logical to me a couple of years earlier... > >The only question is how you define "panic mode". Deep Blue had something more >refined >that just "the score dropped" but I never followed Hsu's explanation since it >was very brief and >unclear (to me). Something like "if the size of the tree can't be expressed in >a canonical form, >then we consider the tree to be unstable." > >His idea worked, even if I didn't understand how it worked. But it would use >more time in >positions where it had not yet failed low, which was the important point.
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.