Author: Jeremiah Penery
Date: 16:57:21 12/29/02
Go up one level in this thread
On December 29, 2002 at 19:45:19, Tony Werten wrote: >On December 29, 2002 at 19:35:52, Martin Giepmans wrote: > >>On December 29, 2002 at 19:05:51, Tony Werten wrote: >> >>>http://members.home.nl/matador/chess840.htm >>> >>>Tony >> >>The formula for reductions 2b and 2c look strange: >>"alpha < score + threat + margin --> reduce depth ..." >> >>This would imply that a bigger threat gives more reductions ... >>Should be score - threat - margin? > >Or ALPHA should have been BETA. > >I'm not sure if this is a "position below alpha wich is not going to improve" or >a "position above beta wich is not going to deteriorate" > >I have to let it sink in. > >I feel good because I have been working on this stuff before, I feel bad because >I dropped it because I didn't use that last small refinement Ed explains. Well, >given 20 years I would have found it (maybe) > >BTW Ed, I send you a personal mail. ( from the webpage) I would guess the sign should be changed: score + threat + margin < alpha --> reduce depth
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.