Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 18:39:57 09/16/98
Go up one level in this thread
On September 16, 1998 at 11:31:22, William H Rogers wrote: >On September 15, 1998 at 18:51:00, John Coffey wrote: > >>Let say hypothetically that I have a program that is doing a simple >>3 ply search, but will extend its look ahead for every capture. The question >>becomes, how far should the look ahead be extended? The last time I wrote >>a chess program (1987) I found that the program would examine frivilous >>captures out to infinity if I didn't put a limit on it. (I literally had >>20 captures in a row.) >> >>So say I limit the extensions to 2*N, where if N is 3 then 2*N equals 6. >>Seems to me that this might not yield an accurate result and could still give >>lots of frivilous captures. >> >>John Coffey > >I think that you are missing something. Assuming that you are capturing a piece >located at KP4.. the only captures that your program should be looking at is the >pieces that can attack KP4..I can see no way that in any situation that there >can be more than 5 or so pieces attacking the same square, so you only search >captures on that square until there are no more possible captures. >The Alpha-Beta routine should eliminate some before the list grows to big. > >BILL ROGERS >WROGERS824@AOL.COM No... that would lead to tactical mistakes. The point of many captures is to expose an overloaded piece on the opponent's side... a piece that is defending two things, and when it captures on one square, it leaves another square not defended. So in our capture search we don't only look at one square, we look at *all* possible capture moves... to catch these problems...
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.