Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Doesn't appear to work for me (full data)

Author: Uri Blass

Date: 12:30:51 11/22/02

Go up one level in this thread


On November 22, 2002 at 13:11:42, Josť Carlos wrote:

>On November 21, 2002 at 04:48:15, Uri Blass wrote:
>
>>On November 20, 2002 at 19:02:49, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote:
>>
>>>On November 20, 2002 at 18:54:30, Omid David Tabibi wrote:
>>>
>>>>>Could you please compare (Adptv + small quiesc) vs (Vrfd +small quiesc) ?
>>>
>>>When I have more time.
>>>
>>>If you want more data, I expect others will post results
>>>from their programs as well. Maybe those are more encouraging...
>>
>>I will post after I implement the code.
>>I have a problem because I am not sure how to implement the code in movei:
>>
>>
>>
>>Movei does not use null move pruning when the remaining depth is 1.
>>I have special pruning rules for that case
>>The pseudo code of movei is:
>>
>>
>>int alphabeta(int depth, int alpha, int beta)
>>{
>>1.depth=depth+extensions
>>2.if (depth<=0) return quiescence()
>>3.if pruning rules happen return beta(pruning rules happen mainly when depth=1)
>>4.if repetition return 0
>
>  Why don't you do repetition test in the first place? If this node yields a
>repetition, you shouldn't return quiescence nor beta. Or am I missing something?

I do not think that it is better.
I think that repetition usually do not happen so I save time by not detecting
repetition

I think that not doing repetition first is faster and the demage in the worst
case is detecting the repetition later when pruning rules do not happen.

I did not see a case when movei did draw by repetition instead of checkmate
and it seems to me that it cannot happen because the pruning rules are not going
to prune when the score is checkmate and I had repetition detection in qsearch.

Uri



This page took 0.13 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.