Author: Walter Faxon
Date: 11:11:34 01/20/03
Go up one level in this thread
On January 19, 2003 at 09:08:51, Joel wrote: >Hello All, > >Just finished writing a simple Quiscient Search function, using MVV/LVA... > >Now, previously my engine was using MTD(f) to power it. This obviously relies >heavily on the transposition table for good performance. > >So this brings me to the question of hashing Quiscient nodes. I would like to >know what the generally accepted thing to do is? > >Btw, I am really envious of everyone who has an engine thats able to compete in >CCT5. Hopefully mine will be in an acceptable state next time round. :) > >Thanks, >Joel Joel, all. A suggestion: have a very small second hash table devoted to hashing quiescence nodes exclusively. Simple replacement only. Advantages: (1) little memory latency since this hash table can be mostly cached, and (2) no interference with entries in the main hash table. I don't have a program, so take this idea with a grain of salt. If you try it, please post your results. Thanks. -- Walter
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.