Author: Uri Blass
Date: 13:03:46 12/28/02
Go up one level in this thread
On December 28, 2002 at 15:39:08, Tony Werten wrote: >On December 28, 2002 at 14:17:17, Alessandro Damiani wrote: > >>[snip] >> >>> >>>the problem of most 'reductions' is the hard fact that you lose a full ply >>>near the root. >> >>That's why reductions are not done in every node, but under certain conditions. >>The quality then depends on those conditions, of course. Therefore, reductions >>are not bad per se. > >This was about recursive reductions as FHR. What happens is at a ply you decide >to reduce depth, but 2 ply later, the conditions are still met and you reduce >another ply etc. > >I dumped them because they cost to much tactical strenght. Ed's nonrecursive way >seem to give me a 5% node reduction. Not bad for 2 minutes work. > >Tony The question is still if it does not cost too much tactical strength. It is not clear if being 5% faster in 95% of the cases and seeing tactics one ply later in 5% of the cases is a good idea. 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.