Author: Uri Blass
Date: 09:22:54 12/20/02
Go up one level in this thread
On December 20, 2002 at 12:06:15, Tony Werten wrote: >On December 20, 2002 at 10:54:01, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >> >>Where lazy evaluation was easy for me to proof incorrect, with regard to >>futility pruning it is harder to judge. > >Futility pruning cannot be correct either. Or rather, if it was correct it >wouldn't save any nodes. > >Futility assumes that a move cannot bring the score to alfa. If futility is >correct and you would make the move, you would get into quiescence, evaluate, >get a score>=beta back and return. So no nodes saved. Not by my definition of nodes. For me node is every move that I make. I have only one place in my program when I have nodes++ and it is in makemove. If futility is correct and I do not make the move I save one node. I guess that you have another definition of nodes. Uri
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.