Author: Bob Durrett
Date: 07:54:32 12/06/02
Go up one level in this thread
On December 06, 2002 at 10:27:44, Uri Blass wrote: >On December 06, 2002 at 09:58:06, Bob Durrett wrote: > >>On December 06, 2002 at 09:34:16, Uri Blass wrote: >> >><snp> >> >>>Improvement in search rules can help also in non tactical positions. >>>Searching deeper helps also when there is no combination. >>> >>>Uri >> >>Please realize that I am currently a user and not a programmer. To be more >>accurate, I am an obsolete archaic Fortran programmer, sort of. Hence the words >>"Ignorant Question." >> >>There have been many "tricks," such as alpha/beta, discussed here. The >>*primary* purpose of these tricks seems to be to avoid evaluation of unimportant >>portions of the tree of moves [with root at the position of the last move >>played]. >> >>But, to the best of my recollection, this is the first time I have seen the >>words "search rules" used here at CCC. What are they, and what are they good >>for? >> >>Bob D. > >I use these words not because of reading them somewhere but because it is >logical to use these words. > >search rules tell the program where to extend and where to prune and they can >help not only when winning material is possible. > >Uri OK. Thanks. I guess, in the normal course of events, that "search rules" come before "search algorithms." First you must set up a set of "rules," and then try to come up with an algorithm which implements and inforces these rules in some reasonable manner. Only after that is done does the programmer turn his/her attention to coding. Please let me know if I'm still confused. : ) Bob D.
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.