Author: Uri Blass
Date: 10:24:44 03/02/03
Go up one level in this thread
On March 02, 2003 at 12:15:19, Tom Likens wrote: > >I ran across an interesting bug the other day that I thought I'd share >and also get some advice on. I hash the scores and moves that I get >from the tablebases during a search. For a normal draw (i.e. a non- >stalemate draw) I simply store any move that maintains the draw in both >the hash table and the principal variation. > >The problem I ran into is that when a stalemate is encountered, there is >no move to store. This has the potential to corrupt the hash table. >Unfortunately, since the tablebase only returns a 0 for a draw, there is >no easy way to differentiate between the two types of draws. I'm curious >how other people handle this problem. I can think of a couple of >solutions, but none that are completely satisfactory. > >1. Whenever a draw is returned from the tablebase verify that it is > or is not a stalemate. If it is a stalemate, skip the storage step. > This is accurate and works, but it's slow. I do not use tablebases but it is not slow. probing the tablebases is the real slow thing. If you decide to probe the tablebases inspite of that problem then the time to check if the position is stalemate is not significant. 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.