Author: Andreas Guettinger
Date: 12:16:35 11/25/02
Go up one level in this thread
On November 25, 2002 at 14:17:38, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On November 25, 2002 at 04:51:06, David Rasmussen wrote: > >>What SEE implementations are publicly available, besides Crafty's? >>How good is Crafty's SEE compared to "the best"? Can some of the authors of >>closed/commercial programs comment on this? >> >>/David > > >Crafty's is not bad. This is a classic trade-off issue. It could easily be >made more >accurate. IE not using absolute-pinned pieces and so forth. But the question >becomes, >does the cost of the extra accuracy result in tree sizes that are small enough >that the >savings offsets the added computational cost... > >It's easy to make it more accurate. But the question is, "is it worth it?" I would say no. The differences between MVV/LVA are already not that big, so even if the SEE is not the most accuratest, if it is only used for move ordering, that doesn't really. More important is that it is fast and only executed when necessary. regards Andreas
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.