Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: One-reply extension howto

Author: Peter Fendrich

Date: 07:18:27 03/10/03

Go up one level in this thread


On March 04, 2003 at 11:04:00, Robert Hyatt wrote:

>On March 04, 2003 at 05:04:55, Sune Fischer wrote:
>
>>>Note that I don't know of anyone extending when there is only one legal move.
>>>The
>>>original algorithm was "one legal reply to check" which means you are in check
>>>_and_
>>>you have only one way out.
>>
>>Well _I_ want to extend in this case :)
>>Anyway, I don't think "original algorithm" necessarily means "optimal algorithm"
>>;)
>>
>>I think it is related to the re-capture and singular extensions, only problem is
>>how to actually "remember" the only move, on my movelist moves are deleted after
>>being searched... grrr what a drag.
>
>I'll bet that if you extend only on  one legal move and not in check, it will
>only fire a
>dozen times during an entire game.  One legal move is _very_ rare if you aren't
>in check.
>One "logical" move is a different matter.  We played with an option "one sane
>reply" which
>is more general.  Peter Gilgasch proposed it to me and I tried it in Cray Blitz.
> The idea is
>that often you have 2-3 ways out of check, but all but one lead to your getting
>mated.  So you
>extend the one that doesn't get you mated so that you can see deeper to possibly
>see a mate
>there as well...
>
>It is pretty expensive to do this, however, and I didn't keep it very long
>because I was
>beginning to work on the singular extension code and it is a super-set of this
>kind of
>"one-sane-reply" extension.
>
>>
>>While on the subject, how does one detect singular moves?
>
>Singular as in deep blue?
>
>For a move on the PV, search the first move with the normal window a,b.  Search
>the
>remaining moves with the window a-s, b-s where s is the "singular margin,  I
>think I
>used 3/4 pawn or something similar as they did in DB.  If all moves fail low,
>except
>for the first one obviously, then the first move is significantly better than
>the rest.  But
>if one fails high, you have to test _it_ for singularity by seeing if it is "s"
>better than the
>original best move.
>
>For fail-high nodes the same idea but it is expensive.  You fail high on move X.
> Normally
>you would exit _right now_ returning beta, but you first test all the other
>moves with the
>offset (downward) alpha/beta window, but you search to reduced depth to control
>the
>cost.  If the rest of the moves fail low, the fail-high move is singular.
>Re-search it with a
>deeper search.
>
>There is another way to do "pseudo-singular" I can describe if you want...

Yes, Please!
/Peter



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.